Nicolas Sceaux writes:
> Le 3 mars 2010 à 14:52, d...@gnu.org a écrit :
>
>> The use of modules oop and goops appears to me as part of a programming
>> practice at a different knowledge level than to be expected from the
>> audience of this example.
>>
>> If I rewrite the example to get along wi
Le 3 mars 2010 à 14:52, d...@gnu.org a écrit :
> The use of modules oop and goops appears to me as part of a programming
> practice at a different knowledge level than to be expected from the
> audience of this example.
>
> If I rewrite the example to get along without those modules, are there
>
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 10:52 AM, wrote:
> If I rewrite the example to get along without those modules, are there
> chances that the results will get accepted?
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/216066/show
I think that is an excellent idea. We may want to keep both examples
though, just to show
The use of modules oop and goops appears to me as part of a programming
practice at a different knowledge level than to be expected from the
audience of this example.
If I rewrite the example to get along without those modules, are there
chances that the results will get accepted?
http://coderev
lgtm
http://codereview.appspot.com/216066/show
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Le 28 févr. 2010 à 17:11, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit :
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Nicolas Sceaux
> wrote:
>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 7:10 AM, wrote:
This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with
private instance slots.
>>>
>>> Looks OK to me; maybe you
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Nicolas Sceaux
wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 7:10 AM, wrote:
>>> This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with
>>> private instance slots.
>>
>> Looks OK to me; maybe you'd want to pass in the context into the
>> function, so it can do
Le 21 févr. 2010 à 15:11, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit :
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 7:10 AM, wrote:
>> This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with
>> private instance slots.
>
> Looks OK to me; maybe you'd want to pass in the context into the
> function, so it can do addition
nicolas.sce...@gmail.com writes:
> Reviewers: ,
>
> Message:
> Hi,
>
> This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with
> private instance slots.
>
> There is at least one issue that I have to solve before this is
> commitable, as this shows the following warning:
>
> Warning : A
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 7:10 AM, wrote:
> This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with
> private instance slots.
Looks OK to me; maybe you'd want to pass in the context into the
function, so it can do additional switching based on properties?
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Hi,
This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with
private instance slots.
There is at least one issue that I have to solve before this is
commitable, as this shows the following warning:
Warning : Attempting to remove nonexisting listener.
Warning : A
11 matches
Mail list logo
