2008/12/17 Maximilian Albert :
> Whoops, corrected in the attached patch (where the layout block is
> removed, too).
Cheers, I've applied your patches to master.
Regards,
Neil
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.or
2008/12/17 Neil Puttock :
> 2008/12/16 Maximilian Albert :
>
>> Alright, the adapted patch #2 is attached. Obviously I put too much
>> focus on making a regression test more visually appealing than minimal
>> and functional...
>
> Looks OK, but your \header block isn't closed.
Whoops, corrected in
2008/12/16 Maximilian Albert :
> Alright, the adapted patch #2 is attached. Obviously I put too much
> focus on making a regression test more visually appealing than minimal
> and functional...
Looks OK, but your \header block isn't closed.
You can junk the \layout block, since lilypond-book set
2008/12/13 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
> No need to test 3 values, 0.0 and != 0.0 should be enough. Be sure to
> test both stem up and stem down.
>
> Use only 1 note for each situation (or, if you need to test beams, 2).
Alright, the adapted patch #2 is attached. Obviously I put too much
focus on making a
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:20 PM, Maximilian Albert
wrote:
u
>> - add a regtest. Should be short, with a short doc string explaining
>> the functionality.
>
> Done (patch #2). I hope it meets the requirements for a regtest.
> Please let me know if anything is missing or wrong.
No need to test 3 v
2008/12/10 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
> Some random comments:
Thanks for these suggestions! They are implemented in the attached
patches. Please let me know if you'd like some further corrections.
> - have a look at scm/script.scm to set defaults just for staccato.
Following Neil's suggestions, I set t
2008/12/8 Maximilian Albert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Awesome to hear and thanks for testing! What do you guys think, should
> a default value be set, and if so which one? I guess something between
> 0.5 and 0.75 would be sensible, according to Reinholds findings.
Though I much prefer the centred-on
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Maximilian Albert
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Neil,
>
> thanks a lot for your further very helpful ideas. Attached is a patch
> for a new approach which implements your suggestion to define a new
> property. It's called 'shifted-towards-stem and can take any real
2008/12/8 Neil Puttock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This seems to work fine. :)
>
> I've run regtests with and without a default for staccati, and both
> compile without any problems (see the attached image for the expected
> change in staccato-pos.ly when 'shifted-towards-stem is set to 0.5 in
> scrip
2008/12/7 Maximilian Albert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Neil,
>
> thanks a lot for your further very helpful ideas. Attached is a patch
> for a new approach which implements your suggestion to define a new
> property. It's called 'shifted-towards-stem and can take any real
> value, where 0.0 means to
2008/12/7 Maximilian Albert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The same to you! From what I gather you're among the most active ones
> on this list and the German community owes you a lot for all your
> translation (and other) efforts!
Yes indeed, as I had noticed on
http://valentin.villenave.info/The-LilyPo
2008/12/7 Till Rettig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This is great news, I remember I have a piece where the dots are for a realy
> long passage on the top and they look so strange centered by the head. But,
> as Reinhold pointed out, I think they should still be slightly off the stem
> by some amount. A
Maximilian Albert schrieb:
P.S.: In case this gets approved in one form or the other, what would
be necessary to document it properly? Add a LSR example, a regression
test, something else? Anything I need to keep in mind when writing
these?
This is great news, I remember I have a piece where t
Hi Neil,
thanks a lot for your further very helpful ideas. Attached is a patch
for a new approach which implements your suggestion to define a new
property. It's called 'shifted-towards-stem and can take any real
value, where 0.0 means to keep the default position (centered on the
note-head) and 1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Dienstag, 2. Dezember 2008 21:10:50 schrieb Maximilian Albert:
> Just today I saw an example where a marcato over an up-stem half note
> was _not_ shifted and I liked it better. So I'm wondering if for now
> we should only implement the shifting for
Hi Max,
2008/12/2 Maximilian Albert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> OK, so I only need to adapt script-interface::calc-x-offset so that if
> the stem and articulation have the same direction it calculates a
> different horizontal shift, correct? Attached is a patch which
> implements this (it took me a bi
Hi Joe, Neil,
thanks a lot for your quick and helpful responses!
> The right place to look, therefore, is at the
> X-offset property of the Script grob, which is set in
> scm/define-grobs.scm to script-interface::calc-x-offset (which lives in
> scm/output-lib.scm).
OK, so I only need to adapt sc
On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 01:29 +0100, Maximilian Albert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> attached is a patch for bug #218 (see
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=218). It simply
> tests whether the directions of stem and articulation coincide, and if
> so it shifts the latter sideways. Please note
Hi Max,
2008/11/28 Maximilian Albert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> attached is a patch for bug #218 (see
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=218). It simply
> tests whether the directions of stem and articulation coincide, and if
> so it shifts the latter sideways. Please note that the
Hi,
attached is a patch for bug #218 (see
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=218). It simply
tests whether the directions of stem and articulation coincide, and if
so it shifts the latter sideways. Please note that the patch is just a
casual attempt to get more familiar with Lilypo
20 matches
Mail list logo
