On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
> On 08/09/12 16:10, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>>
>> I have in the past talked with people from Henle; also, Schirmer has a
>> style guide that you can order as a book.
>
>
> How far in the past are we talking about? (Just for clarity.)
On 08/09/12 16:10, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
I have in the past talked with people from Henle; also, Schirmer has a
style guide that you can order as a book.
How far in the past are we talking about? (Just for clarity.)
My overall impression is that they are primarily interested in:
* Strict
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>
> I have in the past talked with people from Henle; also, Schirmer has a
> style guide that you can order as a book.
>
> My overall impression is that they are primarily interested in:
>
> * Strict adherence to their publisher style
Does t
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:27 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> No idea. What we have under the umbrella of "syntax discussion"
>> contains three things: lexical units, grammar and vocabulary, mostly
>> implemented in lexer.ll, parser.yy, and *.ly respectively.
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:27 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> No idea. What we have under the umbrella of "syntax discussion"
> contains three things: lexical units, grammar and vocabulary, mostly
> implemented in lexer.ll, parser.yy, and *.ly respectively. In order to
> keep syntax p
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:00 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 4:42 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> There's one thing worth clarifying: when i say "syntax changes", i
> mean "changes in how user input looks like".
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:00 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 4:42 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
There's one thing worth clarifying: when i say "syntax changes", i
mean "changes in how user input looks like". So a renaming of a
command is
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
> Has anyone ever actually engaged with any major publishers to identify the
> factors that are of interest to them in engraving software, and the features
> that Lilypond would have to implement in order to meet their requirements?
I
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 4:42 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> There's one thing worth clarifying: when i say "syntax changes", i
>>> mean "changes in how user input looks like". So a renaming of a
>>> command is a syntax change to me (despite the fact that no grammar
>>> r
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 4:42 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> There's one thing worth clarifying: when i say "syntax changes", i
>> mean "changes in how user input looks like". So a renaming of a
>> command is a syntax change to me (despite the fact that no grammar
>> rules change).
>> That's probably
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>>> Decimal numbers are "inexact". [...]
>>
>> ok, scrap decimals then.
>
> Not necessarily. There are decimal floating point libraries which can
> handle decimal numbers in an exact way.
Guile can most certainly deal with exact rational numbers, and that is
enough to r
>> Decimal numbers are "inexact". [...]
>
> ok, scrap decimals then.
Not necessarily. There are decimal floating point libraries which can
handle decimal numbers in an exact way. The following is used in gcc:
http://speleotrove.com/decimal/decnumber.html
However, I don't think that this i
Reinhold Kainhofer writes:
> On 06/09/2012 10:05, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>> That's more like it, but i'm not totally sure.
>>> What i think of is a general way of attaching objects to another
>>> objects. For example '&' would attach objects:
>>> \arpeggio&\< meaning a
On 06/09/2012 10:05, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> That's more like it, but i'm not totally sure.
>> What i think of is a general way of attaching objects to another
>> objects. For example '&' would attach objects:
>> \arpeggio&\< meaning a hairpin attached to arpeggio
>> g\f
Janek Warchoł writes:
>> Decimal numbers are "inexact". With computers, you'll find that 0.5 and
>> 0.5 will likely add up to result in 1.0, but you'll be lucky if 0.4 and
>> 0.6 add up to 1.0. For music, the concept of simultaneousness is
>> sometimes important: if a dynamic change happens one
It's getting better! yay!
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:10 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> However, i see two problems with this function, and i suppose they're
>> not easy to fix within current framework:
>> 1) it is "prefix". I'm pretty sure that users will get confused as
Janek Warchoł writes:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:42 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:55 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
I don't see why you should not be able to do this using music functions.
>>>
>>> Hmm. You may be absolutely right. Maybe all
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 10:38 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> So in the short- to midterm, the things we can work on are
>
> a) improve automatic untweaked typesetting
> [...]
> a) simplify and improve things across the board
I find these two most important, as they directly improve ordinary
users' exp
Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes:
> I don't see that there is likely to be any big secret around all of
> this, because the major details are likely to be almost entirely the
> same from publisher to publisher. (In STM publishing, for example,
> many of the major rival publishers use the same type
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:42 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:55 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> I don't see why you should not be able to do this using music functions.
>>
>> Hmm. You may be absolutely right. Maybe all we need is to write such
>> func
I'm moving this discussion from -bug to -devel as it seems more appropriate
here.
On 06/09/12 11:56, David Kastrup wrote:
Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes:
Has anyone ever actually engaged with any major publishers to identify
the factors that are of interest to them in engraving software, and
Janek Warchoł writes:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:55 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>> Example: hairpins. There is no convenient way of specifying hairpins
>>> that don't align with the notes (you have to use spacer rests, which
>>> is bad for a number of reasons). We need
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:55 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> Example: hairpins. There is no convenient way of specifying hairpins
>> that don't align with the notes (you have to use spacer rests, which
>> is bad for a number of reasons). We need to have a convenient way.
>> A
23 matches
Mail list logo
