I have now four commits: regtest changes plus one change
in three (sort of unrelated) functions each in bar-line.scm
(colon, extent and line-span computation).
what review process do you prefer/suggest?
one review per commit or review in one, push in four?
uploaded in a single commit for review:
Am 20.08.2012 07:30, schrieb Colin Campbell:
On 12-08-17 06:14 AM, Benkő Pál wrote:
hi all,
[...]
ok, I applied this (and did a bit of restructuring to keep
lyrics-bar.ly the way we like).
I also changed those regtests that show where's the change of dot
placement
inside or outside staff.
I
On 12-08-17 06:14 AM, Benkő Pál wrote:
hi all,
Keith, I hope I fixed lyrics-bar.ly.
Yes, it comes out nicely.
1. in repeat-sign.ly the thick-lined staff has now the dots
outside of staff, while the c++ version had it inside -
there may be a difference how line-thickness is handled.
hi all,
>> Keith, I hope I fixed lyrics-bar.ly.
>
>
> Yes, it comes out nicely.
>
>
>> 1. in repeat-sign.ly the thick-lined staff has now the dots
>>outside of staff, while the c++ version had it inside -
>>there may be a difference how line-thickness is handled.
>
>
> The latest Scheme ve
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 13:32:15 -0700, Benkő Pál wrote:
Keith, I hope I fixed lyrics-bar.ly.
Yes, it comes out nicely.
1. in repeat-sign.ly the thick-lined staff has now the dots
outside of staff, while the c++ version had it inside -
there may be a difference how line-thickness is handl
Am 13.08.2012 22:32, schrieb Benkő Pál:
Marc, Keith, all,
here is an intermediate report on how I stand with bar lines,
find attached a newer version.
Keith, I hope I fixed lyrics-bar.ly.
Marc, there are still differences from the c++ version:
Oh, sorry, I probably used an outdated version of y
Marc, Keith, all,
here is an intermediate report on how I stand with bar lines,
find attached a newer version.
Keith, I hope I fixed lyrics-bar.ly.
Marc, there are still differences from the c++ version:
1. in repeat-sign.ly the thick-lined staff has now the dots
outside of staff, while the c++
Am 10.08.2012 19:00, schrieb Benkő Pál:
hi Marc,
I noticed that your patch didn't include the changes
in bar-line.scm – was that intentional?
The new regtests are already in master; I didn't compile
the regtests, but surely they look strange without the
changes in the colon stencil routine?
ye
hi Marc,
> I noticed that your patch didn't include the changes
> in bar-line.scm – was that intentional?
> The new regtests are already in master; I didn't compile
> the regtests, but surely they look strange without the
> changes in the colon stencil routine?
yes; I want to work on it. I'll le
Am 07.08.2012 22:31, schrieb Benkő Pál:
[...]
If you want to cover all by one patch, I can send the changes
in bar-line.scm to you and you put them into your patch.
What do you think?
good idea, but in the end this patch may be split into four and then
the bar-line changes would go as a separa
Marc Hohl hohlart.de> writes:
> See the attached patch. It seems to work – I checked with
>
> and the output looks as I would expect it.
Pál,
Could you adjust the algorithm to give normal space between repeat dots
in cases with no staff lines at all, like 'lyrics-bar.ly' ?
People will be di
Am 07.08.2012 22:31, schrieb Benkő Pál:
hi Marc,
2012/8/7 Marc Hohl :
Am 07.08.2012 11:20, schrieb benko@gmail.com:
[...]
good idea, but in the end this patch may be split into four and then
the bar-line changes would go as a separate patch anyway.
See the attached patch. It seems to wor
hi Marc,
2012/8/7 Marc Hohl :
> Am 07.08.2012 11:20, schrieb benko@gmail.com:
>
>> the post-1320 version. Marc, please consider patch set 2 for bar-line
>> related changes.
>>
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/6419064/
>>
> OK. Are there specific regression tests covering the repeat dots?
> I
Am 07.08.2012 11:20, schrieb benko@gmail.com:
the post-1320 version. Marc, please consider patch set 2 for bar-line
related changes.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6419064/
OK. Are there specific regression tests covering the repeat dots?
I think they should be inluded in this patch.
If y
the post-1320 version. Marc, please consider patch set 2 for bar-line
related changes.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6419064/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
regtests reorganized and explanations added
http://codereview.appspot.com/6419064/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
`make check` succeeded for me, and I cannot see anything that would
cause a problem for the patchy script.
The code looks fine; regression tests have a minor problem.
I compared this with the previous patch at
http://codereview.appspot.com/6351107/diff2/2003:8001/lily/bar-line.cc
http://codere
Reviewers: Keith, dak, marc,
Message:
when splitting the previous patch into smaller commits I added new
regtests and found further errors with bar-line.
to fix those there are some changes from the previous version:
- calc_bar_extent now not only shrinks the bar line, but can expand it
for narro
18 matches
Mail list logo
