On 2010/08/13 11:04:00, Carl wrote:
LGTM.
Carl
Thanks Carl.
I'll push this patchset shortly (with regression tests).
-Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/show
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org
LGTM.
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/show
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Thanks Carl. I'll upload my changes shortly.
-Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/35001/36003
File scm/define-stencil-commands.scm (left):
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/35001/36003#oldcode30
scm/define-stencil-commands.scm:30: connected-shape
On 2010/07/28 19:08:16
Looks very nice! Just a few comments.
Thanks,
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/35001/36003
File scm/define-stencil-commands.scm (left):
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/35001/36003#oldcode30
scm/define-stencil-commands.scm:30: connected-shape
Shouldn't path be in th
Hi all,
This patchset integrates some of Mike's work in order to fix the stencil
extents for paths and to combine some duplicate functionality.
Thanks,
Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/show
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@
Op dinsdag 13-07-2010 om 21:49 uur [tijdzone +], schreef
pnor...@gmail.com:
> Jan: I like your idea about using a separate module to evaluate the
> various commands, though IIUC, this would be duplicating the work done
> by the backend "path" procedures in output-ps.scm and output-svg.scm,
> s
I am currently working on integrating my work with Mike's new stencil
routines, so I'll post a new patch when that's ready.
Jan: I like your idea about using a separate module to evaluate the
various commands, though IIUC, this would be duplicating the work done
by the backend "path" procedures i
On 2010/07/05 05:48:16, MikeSol wrote:
I see 3.5 places where the patch may need improvement. 1 is that
lineto and
curveto seem unnecessary, as they can be automatically detected by the
number of
function arguments.
For purposes of human readability, I think we should keep lineto and
curv
Great work!
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/17001/12002
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/17001/12002#newcode743
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:743:
I think this is EXCELLENT work and has enough shared features with the
recently-c
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
> Op zaterdag 26-06-2010 om 00:06 uur [tijdzone +], schreef
> pnor...@gmail.com:
>
>> Let me know what you think.
>
> It's getting there...
>
> This is not exactly what I had in mind
>
> + (if (or (eq? (caar commands) 'moveto)
> +
Op zaterdag 26-06-2010 om 00:06 uur [tijdzone +], schreef
pnor...@gmail.com:
> Let me know what you think.
It's getting there...
This is not exactly what I had in mind
+(if (or (eq? (caar commands) 'moveto)
+ (eq? (caar commands) 'rmoveto))
+ (let ((command (car commands
On 6/26/10 3:27 AM, "Mike Solomon" wrote:
> Sorry - I should have replied to this earlier, but I was away from my
> computer.
> In woodwinds, I believe that the "make-connected-shape-stencil" does exactly
> this - I use it to draw paths and automate finding extents. Rather than
> adding two t
LGTM, with a couple of minor spacing issues.
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/17001/12002
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/17001/12002#newcode2782
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:2782: (make-override-markup
'(line-cap-style
Sorry - I should have replied to this earlier, but I was away from my
computer.
In woodwinds, I believe that the "make-connected-shape-stencil" does exactly
this - I use it to draw paths and automate finding extents. Rather than
adding two things w/ similar functionalities to Lilypond, I think it
On 2010/06/22 03:50:24, Carl wrote:
On 2010/06/21 22:39:53, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> On 2010/06/20 11:07:37, Carl wrote:
> > Is it possible to have the path command estimate reasonable
> > extents, rather than using (0 . 0) and (0 . 0)? Since we
> > know the thickness of the line, and we have a
On 2010/06/22 04:27:22, hanwenn wrote:
cool idea for a patch
Interesting -- why is path given as a string instead of
a list of commands, ie
"moveto 0 0
rcurveto 1 2"
'((moveto 0 0)
(curveto 1 2))
moveto and curveto can be defined in the .scm backends
appropriately -- possibly we a
cool idea for a patch
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/1/2
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/1/2#newcode667
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:667: closepath
just a random comment: while the syntax/interface makes sense for
someone typ
I've added my draft of an algorithm to estimate the extents.
Thanks,
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/1/2
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/1/2#newcode684
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:684: (cons 0 0)))
On 2010/06/21 22:39
Reviewers: carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com,
Message:
Thanks Carl.
I'll be uploading a new patch shortly.
-Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/1/2
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/1/2#newcode622
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:622
Thanks for doing this. I think this looks quite good.
As I mention below, I think it might be best to eliminate the "style"
arguments and make them part of the properties. We already have
'thickness as a property, and we could add 'path-details.
Or we could make 'path-thickness part of 'path-d
20 matches
Mail list logo
