On Fri, Aug 14, 2009, Mark Polesky said:
>> If all \foo were right-associative it would be easy to read them. Is it
>> possible to make monadic operators right-associative so as to end this
>> confusion? Yes, i realize this could have a nasty impact; if done at all
>> it would mean devising a
Mark Polesky schrieb:
* there are single and double angle-brackets here. Recently I've
noticed some e-mail clients and/or mailing list archives do
weird things with them (like removing them). Just in case you
think I accidentally left something out!
Yes, the closing angled bracket is n
"dem...@suffolk.lib.ny.us" wrote:
> a b c d\lefty e f g
>
> (above) \lefty has an intuitive association with the d.
>
> a b c \righty d e f g
>
> (above) \righty is intuitivly ambiguous,
> (below), \righty has a false intuitive association with the 'c'
>
> a b c\righty d
This is an interesti
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009, Graham Percival said:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 09:28:02AM +0200, Marc Hohl wrote:
>> I mean, we code and read music from left to right, so
>> it seems nore natural to me to have the command changing
>> the behaviour of a note in front of it.
Some like postscript and HP ca
Graham Percival schrieb:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 09:28:02AM +0200, Marc Hohl wrote:
Graham Percival schrieb:
Yes, this is planned. It's been on my list of discussions to
introduce when the website/build stuff is finished, for about two
months now.
Sorry to interrupt, but what
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 09:28:02AM +0200, Marc Hohl wrote:
> Graham Percival schrieb:
>> Yes, this is planned. It's been on my list of discussions to
>> introduce when the website/build stuff is finished, for about two
>> months now.
>
> Sorry to interrupt, but what's wrong with prefix notation
Graham Percival schrieb:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 08:51:42PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:32 PM
And if we're ever going to move it to a postfix operator (which is one
of
the goals of the GLISS project), now is the time, before we get a
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 08:51:42PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:32 PM
>
>> And if we're ever going to move it to a postfix operator (which is one
>> of
>> the goals of the GLISS project), now is the time, before we get a
>> strong
>> codebase
Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:32 PM
And if we're ever going to move it to a postfix operator (which is
one of
the goals of the GLISS project), now is the time, before we get a
strong
codebase of music function applications.
I'm beginning to wonder whether this is a
desira
On 8/12/09 9:24 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
>
>
> Carl Sorensen Friday, August 07, 2009 2:49 PM
>>
>> The generic approach has now been pushed to git
>>
>> 247f0b6d46fd8f3253a99f95a70ce14345daa5f9
>>
>> There's a generic styledNoteHeads music function that applies a
>> note style
>> to mu
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009, Trevor Daniels said:
> function like all music functions is a prefix
> operator. Applied to a sequence of notes like
>
> \xNote { e f }
>
> it's fine, but
>
> c d\xNote e f
> < g \xNote c f >
Conventions aside (...like all music functions...), my preference would be
f
Carl Sorensen Friday, August 07, 2009 2:49 PM
The generic approach has now been pushed to git
247f0b6d46fd8f3253a99f95a70ce14345daa5f9
There's a generic styledNoteHeads music function that applies a
note style
to music whether or not it's in a chord construct.
Carl, I am part-way through
Trevor Daniels treda.co.uk> writes:
>
> I've finally got around to looking at this.
> It seems the \deadNote function works fine,
> but \deadNotesOn and \deadNotesOff do not.
>
> I had a quick look at their definitions and
> I think they should be
>
> deadNotesOn =
> #(define-music-function
Carl Sorensen wrote Friday, August 07, 2009 2:49 PM
The generic approach has now been pushed to git
247f0b6d46fd8f3253a99f95a70ce14345daa5f9
There's a generic styledNoteHeads music function that applies a
note style
to music whether or not it's in a chord construct.
deadNotes and palmMute
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
[...]
The generic approach has now been pushed to git
247f0b6d46fd8f3253a99f95a70ce14345daa5f9
There's a generic styledNoteHeads music function that applies a note style
to music whether or not it's in a chord construct.
deadNotes and palmMute have been redefined to use
Carl Sorensen wrote Friday, August 07, 2009 2:49 PM
On 8/5/09 7:19 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 05, 2009 1:42 PM
If we decide to use this same function for the general case of
switching to
a cross-shaped notehead, then we will redefine it to either
cros
On 8/5/09 7:19 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
>
>
> Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 05, 2009 1:42 PM
>
>> If we decide to use this same function for the general case of
>> switching to
>> a cross-shaped notehead, then we will redefine it to either
>> crossHead or
>> xHead, but we will st
Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 05, 2009 3:07 PM
On 8/5/09 7:22 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
I think it was a pity that the groundwork
for a more generic approach was not laid
down right away, so we could have easily
added the aliases for all the other uses
of crossheads
I'll try to g
dem...@suffolk.lib.ny.us schrieb:
Please dont rename the cross head, it has a name, predating any usage
stemming from rock musicians jargon. That name is further 'blessed' by
the unicode standard, "Musical Symbol X Notehead", 1D143.
I think Lilypond should propose both, the "official", s
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009, Carl Sorensen said:
>
>
>
> On 8/5/09 7:22 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
>
>>>
>>> In the meantime, we can move forward on tablature.
>>>
>>> As I see it, the current decision causes problems only if we were
>>> to change
>>> to xHead in the future and eliminate deadNote
On 8/5/09 7:22 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
>>
>> In the meantime, we can move forward on tablature.
>>
>> As I see it, the current decision causes problems only if we were
>> to change
>> to xHead in the future and eliminate deadNote. And I see no plans
>> in the
>> future to eliminate dead
Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 05, 2009 1:42 PM
On 8/5/09 2:44 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
Carl, Marc
After the long discussion about naming the
new cross-head function and associated predefs
I see you have retained deadNote as the base
name.
I thought the outcome of the discussion
Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 05, 2009 1:42 PM
On 8/5/09 2:44 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
Carl, Marc
After the long discussion about naming the
new cross-head function and associated predefs
I see you have retained deadNote as the base
name.
I thought the outcome of the discussion
On 8/5/09 2:44 AM, "Trevor Daniels" wrote:
> Carl, Marc
>
> After the long discussion about naming the
> new cross-head function and associated predefs
> I see you have retained deadNote as the base
> name.
>
> I thought the outcome of the discussion
> was to use xHead or crossHead for the b
Trevor Daniels schrieb:
Carl, Marc
After the long discussion about naming the
new cross-head function and associated predefs
I see you have retained deadNote as the base
name.
I thought the outcome of the discussion
was to use xHead or crossHead for the base
name with deadNote being defined to
Carl, Marc
After the long discussion about naming the
new cross-head function and associated predefs
I see you have retained deadNote as the base
name.
I thought the outcome of the discussion
was to use xHead or crossHead for the base
name with deadNote being defined to invoke
the base function
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:37 AM, wrote:
> > If this were strictly a tablature issue, I'd say keep it at "dead notes",
> > since that is the guitar term.
>
> but what of citterns, ukes, banjoes and other modern plucked instruments
> who would (do) use tablature notation?
>
> BTW, its been several
> If this were strictly a tablature issue, I'd say keep it at "dead notes",
> since that is the guitar term.
but what of citterns, ukes, banjoes and other modern plucked instruments
who would (do) use tablature notation?
BTW, its been several decades since I was actively consulting tutors on
cl
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
Wikipedia (in a poorly-cited article) uses the term "ghost note" for all
instruments (including the string-muted and palm-muted notes). This entry
seems to indicate that "ghost note" is a term widely used with drums.
Following up on links to "ghost note" in the guitar wor
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 02:09:57PM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
>
> I prefer "muted" rather than "dead". Though, the LilyPond internals
> can get kind of violent, especially with the Hara_kiri_engraver,
We actually changed the name based on a complaint --
\removeStaffContext used to be called \hara
On 7/20/09 3:09 PM, "Mark Polesky" wrote:
>
>
> Marc Hohl wrote:
>> Hm, sounds kind of morbid to me, calling a note "dead", but since
>> I am not a native english speaker, I cannot judge this from a neutral
>> point of view.
>> Do you think that there will arise big problems with these comma
On 7/20/09 3:09 PM, "Mark Polesky" wrote:
>
>
> Marc Hohl wrote:
>> Hm, sounds kind of morbid to me, calling a note "dead", but since
>> I am not a native english speaker, I cannot judge this from a neutral
>> point of view.
>> Do you think that there will arise big problems with these comma
Marc Hohl wrote:
> Hm, sounds kind of morbid to me, calling a note "dead", but since
> I am not a native english speaker, I cannot judge this from a neutral
> point of view.
> Do you think that there will arise big problems with these commands?
> I think \deadNotesOn and \deadNote are rather self-
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
On 7/17/09 10:16 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote:
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
Right, so we *must* have the function mode. Do we need the setting mode as
well? I don't feel strongly about eliminating it, but I don't feel strongly
about keeping it either. I trust your judgme
On 7/17/09 10:16 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote:
> Carl Sorensen schrieb:
>>
>> Right, so we *must* have the function mode. Do we need the setting mode as
>> well? I don't feel strongly about eliminating it, but I don't feel strongly
>> about keeping it either. I trust your judgment.
>>
> I prefe
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
Right, so we *must* have the function mode. Do we need the setting mode as
well? I don't feel strongly about eliminating it, but I don't feel strongly
about keeping it either. I trust your judgment.
I prefer to offer both variants.
However, now that I think about i
On 7/17/09 2:13 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote:
> Carl Sorensen schrieb:
>>
>> On 7/16/09 9:56 AM, "Carl Sorensen" wrote:
>>
>>
>> 3) Is it necessary (or desirable) to have both \deadNote and
>> \deadNoteOn..\deadNoteOff? Unless a whole piece is to be written in
>> DeadNotes, I can't imagine that
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
2) Your regression test for the modernTab clef:
Doc header should say "four- to seven- stringed instruments", which means
instruments having four to seven strings. "four to seven stringed
instruments" means four to seven instruments having strings. Isn't english
fun?
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
On 7/16/09 9:56 AM, "Carl Sorensen" wrote:
Marc Hohl has completed a patch for improved tablature support. It is
available for review at:
http://codereview.appspot.com/95059
Please review and comment.
Thanks,
Marc,
Here are some comments.
1) All regressi
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
On 7/16/09 5:54 PM, "Jonathan Kulp" wrote:
Carl Sorensen wrote:
So, while I asked Marc to provide documentation, I didn't require it. I
did, however, require regtests.
As soon as we get the patch applied, we can ask one of the people who is
clamoring for impr
On 7/16/09 5:54 PM, "Jonathan Kulp" wrote:
> Carl Sorensen wrote:
>>
>> So, while I asked Marc to provide documentation, I didn't require it. I
>> did, however, require regtests.
>>
>> As soon as we get the patch applied, we can ask one of the people who is
>> clamoring for improved tab sup
Carl Sorensen wrote:
So, while I asked Marc to provide documentation, I didn't require it. I
did, however, require regtests.
As soon as we get the patch applied, we can ask one of the people who is
clamoring for improved tab support on -user to get involved in writing the
documentation for it,
On 7/16/09 9:56 AM, "Carl Sorensen" wrote:
> Marc Hohl has completed a patch for improved tablature support. It is
> available for review at:
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/95059
>
> Please review and comment.
>
> Thanks,
Marc,
Here are some comments.
1) All regression tests should b
Carl Sorensen wrote:
I like the features, especially the "moderntab" clef. Is it best
for "numbersOnly" to be default? I'm not saying it isn't best, I
really don't know. I'm a classical guitarist and have never dealt
with tablature except when working on the fretted-strings.itely
and recently w
On 7/16/09 4:00 PM, "Jonathan Kulp" wrote:
> Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> Marc Hohl has completed a patch for improved tablature support. It is
>> available for review at:
>>
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/95059
>>
>> Please review and comment.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Carl
>>
>
> I like the fe
Carl Sorensen wrote:
Marc Hohl has completed a patch for improved tablature support. It is
available for review at:
http://codereview.appspot.com/95059
Please review and comment.
Thanks,
Carl
I like the features, especially the "moderntab" clef. Is it best
for "numbersOnly" to be default
Marc Hohl has completed a patch for improved tablature support. It is
available for review at:
http://codereview.appspot.com/95059
Please review and comment.
Thanks,
Carl
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/
47 matches
Mail list logo
