Re: Doc: Reorganize music functions material. (issue1031044)

2010-05-07 Thread n . puttock
LGTM. http://codereview.appspot.com/1031044/show ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Doc: Reorganize music functions material. (issue1031044)

2010-05-07 Thread n . puttock
On 2010/05/07 12:20:50, Graham Percival wrote: The patch looks ok, but I'm getting some weird build errors... quite possibly the same thing Werner noticed (wherein lilypond-book borks if it has two identical snippets). No problems here following a clean build. Cheers, Neil http://coderevi

Re: Doc: Reorganize music functions material. (issue1031044)

2010-05-07 Thread percival . music . ca
The patch looks ok, but I'm getting some weird build errors... quite possibly the same thing Werner noticed (wherein lilypond-book borks if it has two identical snippets). My main goal today was to check Patrick's build system changes, so I'll have to leave it with this vague warning. If you can

Re: Doc: Reorganize music functions material. (issue1031044)

2010-05-07 Thread Mark Polesky
patch set 4 is up: http://codereview.appspot.com/1031044 ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Doc: Reorganize music functions material. (issue1031044)

2010-05-06 Thread Carl Sorensen
On 5/6/10 7:43 PM, "markpole...@gmail.com" wrote: > On 2010/05/06 22:50:25, c_sorensen_byu.edu wrote: >> The preferred predicate to check for list in lilypond >> is cheap-list?, rather than list?. > > Should we encourage users to use `cheap-list?' instead of > `list?' in their own music-funct