Passes Make but lots of reg test diffs
http://lilypond-stuff.1065243.n5.nabble.com/Tracker-1986-reg-tests-td4962636.html
James
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman
On 2011/11/04 07:43:07, Keith wrote:
On 2011/11/02 10:19:10, http://mike_apollinemike.com wrote:
>
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/diff/19014/lily/beam-quanting.cc#newcode743
> >>> lily/beam-quanting.cc:743: if (do_initial_slope_calculations_)
> >>> Even if we made an earlier pass, and a
Passes Make but a lot of reg test diffs show up
Load index.html from the zip here:
http://lilypond-stuff.1065243.n5.nabble.com/Tracker-1986-reg-tests-td4962636.html
James
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypon
On Nov 1, 2011, at 7:59 PM, Keith OHara wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 04:41:22 -0700, m...@apollinemike.com
> wrote:
>
>> Where is this advertising? Is it the word prolongation?
>
> Yes. When a beam grob is passed to a function called prolongation people will
> at first think the function len
Hey all,I've decided to pull my patch for issue 1986 off the current countdown. After incorporating Keith's suggestions and moving the calculations for a beam's concaveness into Beam_scoring_problem, the patch has changed significantly enough from yesterday to merit a new countdown.With these addi
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 04:41:22 -0700, m...@apollinemike.com
wrote:
Where is this advertising? Is it the word prolongation?
Yes. When a beam grob is passed to a function called prolongation people will
at first think the function lengthens the beam.
To make things more consistent, I could c
Thanks Keith!
I've incorporated most of your comments into the code and otherwise have a
couple questions below.
No change in the regtests & a new patch set up.
Cheers,
MS
On Nov 1, 2011, at 5:19 AM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
> This looks more reasonable.
> I read through a few times until I
This looks more reasonable.
I read through a few times until I had it figured out.
I left comments where I really needed either code comments or better
variable names.
Do you know the performance cost of turning on peters-prolongation?
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/diff/19014/Documentat
On Oct 28, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 01:34:00 -0700, m...@apollinemike.com
> wrote:
>
>>> What about the x_span_ of the Beam_scoring_problem ?
>>
>> It represents two things at two different stages of Beam_scoring_problem.
>
> Too bad you didn't use two differ
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 01:34:00 -0700, m...@apollinemike.com
wrote:
What about the x_span_ of the Beam_scoring_problem ?
It represents two things at two different stages of Beam_scoring_problem.
Too bad you didn't use two different variables.
Starting at update_x_span_after_extremal_hangove
On Oct 26, 2011, at 10:13 PM, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
> I don't understand beam-quanting well enough to evaluate most of the
> code, but I've seen some concerns in properties and regtests.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carl
>
>
Carl,
In general, you're absolutely right about the regtests. I've s
On Oct 26, 2011, at 9:41 PM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:40:27 -0700, m...@apollinemike.com
> wrote:
>
>> What needs comments?
>
> Description of the different setup of the three instances of
> Beam_scoring_problem, and their goals.
>
Done
>> -) the x-span of the Beam
I don't understand beam-quanting well enough to evaluate most of the
code, but I've seen some concerns in properties and regtests.
Thanks,
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/diff/2004/input/regression/beam-broken-scriabin-individual.ly
File input/regression/beam-broken-scriabin-indivi
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:40:27 -0700, m...@apollinemike.com
wrote:
What needs comments?
Description of the different setup of the three instances of
Beam_scoring_problem, and their goals.
-) the x-span of the Beam are stored in X-positions
(calc_x_positions). these are used everywhere that
On Oct 26, 2011, at 8:22 PM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
> On 2011/10/26 15:41:12, MikeSol wrote:
>> All problems fixed and ready for a review.
>
> Thoroughly indecipherable.
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/
Sorry if anything's unclear - your intuition from a previous e-mail was right
On 2011/10/26 15:41:12, MikeSol wrote:
All problems fixed and ready for a review.
Thoroughly indecipherable.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypon
Reviewers: Keith, mike_apollinemike.com,
Message:
All problems fixed and ready for a review.
A few things:
1) please ignore the commented out printf statements. i use them for
debugging, and i'll delete them before pushing.
2) the regtest may be a little excessive :) unless people think this
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:19:41 -0700, m...@apollinemike.com
wrote:
Before this patch, the x_span of beams was only ever calculated between the
first normal stem and last normal stem of a beam (omitting any trailing beamage
on the left or right coming from breaks and/or stemlets). If it has a
On Oct 25, 2011, at 5:52 AM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/diff/2001/lily/beam.cc
> File lily/beam.cc (right):
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/diff/2001/lily/beam.cc#newcode987
> lily/beam.cc:987: Beam::calc_x_span (Grob *me_non_spanner, Grob
> *c
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/diff/2001/lily/beam.cc
File lily/beam.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060/diff/2001/lily/beam.cc#newcode987
lily/beam.cc:987: Beam::calc_x_span (Grob *me_non_spanner, Grob
*commonx)
Why should the x-span of a line-broken beam depend on whether
20 matches
Mail list logo
