2009/7/22 Mark Polesky :
> Am I to assume that patch 0002 is error-free? It's not like you
> to accidentally skip over something, but I had to ask!
Yep, looks fine.
Regards,
Neil
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu
Neil Puttock wrote:
> LGTM apart from a few tiny details which have caught my eye:
>
> (0001-define-grobs.scm-Sort-interfaces.patch)
> (0003-define-music-properties.scm-Sort-all-music-propertie.patch)
> (0004-define-music-types.scm-Sort-music-descriptions-alist.patch)
Neil,
Am I to assume that
2009/7/21 Mark Polesky :
> Here are four more code-cleanup patches.
>
> Okay to apply?
LGTM apart from a few tiny details which have caught my eye:
(0001-define-grobs.scm-Sort-interfaces.patch)
@@ -1871,10 +1870,10 @@
(X-offset . ,ly:self-alignment-interface::x-aligne
2009/7/19 Mark Polesky :
> I attached the updated patch. Okay to apply?
Nearly there...
+ (note-columns ,ly:grob-array? "A list of @code{NoteColumn} grobs.")
"An array of @code{NoteColumn} grobs.")
Regards,
Neil
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
Okay,
following the combined suggestions of Neil and Joe, I made these
changes to the define-grob-properties patch:
1) keep in "grobs & grob arrays." section, unmodified:
* (accidental-grobs ,list? ...)
2) keep in "grobs & grob arrays." section, but change type:
* (note-columns ,ly:grob-ar
2009/7/19 Mark Polesky :
> Are these two patches okay to apply?
LGTM.
> Starting on line 845 in define-grob-properties.scm, there is a group
> labeled "grobs & grob arrays", and of the 60 or so properties there, all
> of them have type ly:grob or ly:grob-array, except the following nine.
> Should
Are these two patches okay to apply?
I have a question about the second one.
Starting on line 845 in define-grob-properties.scm, there is a group
labeled "grobs & grob arrays", and of the 60 or so properties there, all
of them have type ly:grob or ly:grob-array, except the following nine.
Should
