http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/3002/lily/lily-guile.cc
File lily/lily-guile.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/3002/lily/lily-guile.cc#newcode573
lily/lily-guile.cc:573: o = scm_to_int (k);
shouldn't it be
int i = scm_to_int (k)
if (i >= 0)
return (vsiz
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/3002/lily/lily-guile.cc
File lily/lily-guile.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/3002/lily/lily-guile.cc#newcode574
lily/lily-guile.cc:574: if (o >= 0)
gcc gives a warning that this test is always true.
'o' is type vsize which is a Li
On Dec 28, 2011, at 8:02 PM, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> On Dec 28, 2011, at 6:47 PM, n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On 2011/12/28 17:41:03, mike_apollinemike.com wrote:
>>
>>> I added it precisely to un-silently prevent negative numbers.
>>> It's true that it has no analogue in Scheme, but
On Dec 28, 2011, at 6:47 PM, n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 2011/12/28 17:41:03, mike_apollinemike.com wrote:
>
>> I added it precisely to un-silently prevent negative numbers.
>> It's true that it has no analogue in Scheme, but I didn't think this
> was a
>> prerequisite for adding a predicate.
On 2011/12/28 17:41:03, mike_apollinemike.com wrote:
I added it precisely to un-silently prevent negative numbers.
It's true that it has no analogue in Scheme, but I didn't think this
was a
prerequisite for adding a predicate. In lily.scm, there are several
predicates
that don't have Scheme
On Dec 28, 2011, at 6:30 PM, n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/3002/scm/define-grob-properties.scm
> File scm/define-grob-properties.scm (right):
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/3002/scm/define-grob-properties.scm#newcode1101
> scm/define-gr
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/3002/scm/define-grob-properties.scm
File scm/define-grob-properties.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/3002/scm/define-grob-properties.scm#newcode1101
scm/define-grob-properties.scm:1101: (skyline-quantizing ,ly:vsize? "The
number o
On Dec 28, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> It would be great to fix this too!
> You know, one thing comes to my mind: should we really use boxes for
> all sorts of collision calculations? I think it would give much
> better results it we calculated real distance between objects (i.e.
>
2011/12/28 m...@apollinemike.com :
>
> On Dec 25, 2011, at 10:50 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> My (quick) question is: would be easy to apply your solution to other
>> objects? I know that lyrics and dynamics really need improvement in
>> this area too - see this example: http://www.sendspace.com/fi
On 28/12/2011 11:40, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> On Dec 25, 2011, at 10:50 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> Vertical skylines are useful for any object whose height changes appreciably
> over its horizontal span. Slurs (sometimes) fall into this category.
> Accidentals fall into this category as w
On Dec 28, 2011, at 3:41 AM, "m...@apollinemike.com"
wrote:
>
> On Dec 25, 2011, at 10:50 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> (i've come back finally) When i was thinking about LilyPond lately, i
>> decided that changing character outlines from boxes to something more
>> precise w
On Dec 28, 2011, at 11:49 AM, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
>> I am not sure that dynamics and lyrics have subtleties in their
> shape that could be better approximated by the use of boxes (perhaps
> dynamics more than lyrics as they are slanted, but I'm dubious of
> this).
>
> You might also have a l
> I am not sure that dynamics and lyrics have subtleties in their
shape that could be better approximated by the use of boxes (perhaps
dynamics more than lyrics as they are slanted, but I'm dubious of
this).
You might also have a look at issue #1097. Should be almost trivial
for you :-)
We
On Dec 25, 2011, at 10:50 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> (i've come back finally) When i was thinking about LilyPond lately, i
> decided that changing character outlines from boxes to something more
> precise was perhaps the most important thing we should improve now -
> and i see that
Hi Mike,
(i've come back finally) When i was thinking about LilyPond lately, i
decided that changing character outlines from boxes to something more
precise was perhaps the most important thing we should improve now -
and i see that you are working on this! Great!
My (quick) question is: would be
On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:11 PM, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
> Mike, have you done any work to examine the effect of the value of
> n_boxes on a) computation time, and b) quality of engraving fit? If
> there is no effect on computation time, then we might as well err on the
> side of too many.
On 2011/12/21 16:13:13, dak wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/1/lily/slur.cc
File lily/slur.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/1/lily/slur.cc#newcode388
lily/slur.cc:388: vsize N_BOXES = 100;
On 2011/12/21 15:59:52, Neil Puttock wrote:
> Don't you think this
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/1/lily/slur.cc
File lily/slur.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/1/lily/slur.cc#newcode388
lily/slur.cc:388: vsize N_BOXES = 100;
On 2011/12/21 15:59:52, Neil Puttock wrote:
Don't you think this is a bit extravagant? At least, this
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/1/lily/slur.cc
File lily/slur.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5504055/diff/1/lily/slur.cc#newcode388
lily/slur.cc:388: vsize N_BOXES = 100;
Don't you think this is a bit extravagant? At least, this shouldn't be
hard-coded. A coarser integral
19 matches
Mail list logo
