Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Graham Percival
On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 13:11:27 +0200 "Valentin Villenave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/4/26 Nicolas Sceaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > While I'm at it, I was proposing to implement the category thing. > > You're welcome; the question was also whether to give the category as > an optional argu

RE: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Carl D. Sorensen
> -Original Message- > From: Nicolas Sceaux [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 3:49 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: lily-devel; Mats Bengtsson > Subject: Re: Build failure with Scheme (again) > > Le 26 avr. 08 à 04:28, Han-Wen Nienhuys a é

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Valentin Villenave
2008/4/26 Nicolas Sceaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > No, they do work as TextScript or RehearsalMark, but you have to > adapt line-width. Right! They do work as TextScripts attached to a note, but as RehearsalMarks they can go out of the page (or when they're attached to MultiMeasureRests, see issue

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Nicolas Sceaux
Le 26 avr. 08 à 13:11, Valentin Villenave a écrit : - toplevel (here we'd better put all commands that don't work inside a \score block, e.g. \fill-line, \wordwrap, \justify-string etc.) No, they do work as TextScript or RehearsalMark, but you have to adapt line-width. _

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Valentin Villenave
2008/4/26 Nicolas Sceaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Valentin is already working on giving > > define-builtin-markup-command an extra argument for "category", Hmm, I'm not anymore right now; I'm waiting to see where this thread is going... :) > > I don't know precisely what Han-Wen and Mats were ta

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Nicolas Sceaux
Le 26 avr. 08 à 12:21, Graham Percival a écrit : On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:02:03 +0200 Nicolas Sceaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Le 26 avr. 08 __ 11:49, Nicolas Sceaux a __crit : Le 26 avr. 08 __ 04:28, Han-Wen Nienhuys a __crit : It would be cool if we could define the markups like (defin

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Graham Percival
On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:02:03 +0200 Nicolas Sceaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Le 26 avr. 08 __ 11:49, Nicolas Sceaux a __crit : > > > Le 26 avr. 08 __ 04:28, Han-Wen Nienhuys a __crit : > > > >> It would be cool if we could define the markups like > >> > >> (define-markup-command (bla layout

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Nicolas Sceaux
Le 26 avr. 08 à 11:49, Nicolas Sceaux a écrit : Le 26 avr. 08 à 04:28, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit : It would be cool if we could define the markups like (define-markup-command (bla layout properties width arg) (number? markup?) ((line-thickness 0.0) (corner-radius 0.2)) .. ) where this

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-26 Thread Nicolas Sceaux
Le 26 avr. 08 à 04:28, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit : It would be cool if we could define the markups like (define-markup-command (bla layout properties width arg) (number? markup?) ((line-thickness 0.0) (corner-radius 0.2)) .. ) where this defines that the bla command uses line-thicknes

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-25 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008/4/25 Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > John: I'm sorry for the breakage. I have removed the property > definition. > > > > > > Han-Wen: Do you mean these properties are not associated with any grob? > > > > > > > > > > Properties are usually associated with interfaces. - we don't hav

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-25 Thread Mats Bengtsson
Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: 2008/4/22 Valentin Villenave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: 2008/4/22 Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: FWIW, I usually leave out documentation for markup-specific > properties. You could put them in the doc string of the markup > command. John: I'm

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-22 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008/4/22 Valentin Villenave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 2008/4/22 Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > FWIW, I usually leave out documentation for markup-specific > > properties. You could put them in the doc string of the markup > > command. > > John: I'm sorry for the breakage. I have r

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-22 Thread Valentin Villenave
2008/4/22 Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > FWIW, I usually leave out documentation for markup-specific > properties. You could put them in the doc string of the markup > command. John: I'm sorry for the breakage. I have removed the property definition. Han-Wen: Do you mean these proper

Re: Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-22 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
FWIW, I usually leave out documentation for markup-specific properties. You could put them in the doc string of the markup command. 2008/4/22 John Mandereau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi Valentin, > > I experience a failure with both make and make web fail when generating > internals documentation

Build failure with Scheme (again)

2008-04-22 Thread John Mandereau
Hi Valentin, I experience a failure with both make and make web fail when generating internals documentation: error: define-grob-properties.scm: cannot find interface for property: corner-radius Cheers, John ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond