Doc: Order of engravers within context matters (673) (issue 6448063)

LGTM, much easier to read now! http://codereview.appspot.com/6448063/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: order of engravers

ns in scm/documentation*. > > I'll see what I can do. > To be honest, I'd really like to tackle a few other issues which > are far more pressing (in my scores). I'd also like you to tackle a few other issues which are far more pressing. In fact, at the moment I can&

Re: order of engravers

Hi Graham, > And have you decided whether this should just go in the > @knownissues on that page, or should it be a separate section? I think it should be in the @knownissues. > That's just it -- there isn't anybody to guide you gently into > that good night. The only clue I know about the IR i

Re: order of engravers

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 07:15:23PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > > > When we deal with open-source volunteer > > projects while we have that much stress in our lives, we all get > > short-tempered. I'm certain that you can think of examples from my > > own emails. > >

Re: order of engravers

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 08:31:11AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi Graham et al, > > From the "header" comments in IR: -snip lots of good data- And have you decided whether this should just go in the @knownissues on that page, or should it be a separate section? James, once we have an ans

Re: order of engravers

Carl Sorensen writes: > This is what I was assuming when I wrote my initial response. It > seemed like "a good idea for somebody to do", not an offer of somebody > wanting to make the change. > > Now, I was wrong in jumping to that assumption and responding > accordingly. But it appears that my

Re: order of engravers

On 4/28/10 11:15 AM, "David Kastrup" wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > >> In Carl's defense, he's horribly busy with end-of-term teaching (which >> always penalizes one's real work, namely research) and then has a >> conference to deal with. When we deal with open-source volunteer >> projects

Re: order of engravers

Graham Percival writes: > In Carl's defense, he's horribly busy with end-of-term teaching (which > always penalizes one's real work, namely research) and then has a > conference to deal with. When we deal with open-source volunteer > projects while we have that much stress in our lives, we all g

Re: order of engravers

On 28 April 2010 13:36, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Can anyone explain to me what's going on here, and why the comments in IR > appear to suggest the opposite of what's actually happening? The comment is obsolete: defaultBarType isn't set by any engraver (it's a user override), so there are no de

Re: order of engravers

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 06:30:29PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Carl Sorensen writes: > > >> And if each engraver specifies what engravers it is relying on in a > >> machine-readable manner (or the respective order in which it wants to be > >> applied), then Lilypond can actually do the required

Re: order of engravers

On 28 April 2010 13:41, David Kastrup wrote: > And if each engraver specifies what engravers it is relying on in a > machine-readable manner (or the respective order in which it wants to be > applied), then Lilypond can actually do the required sorting and figure > out a proper order at runtime.

Re: order of engravers

Carl Sorensen writes: > On 4/28/10 6:41 AM, "David Kastrup" wrote: [...] >> And if each engraver specifies what engravers it is relying on in a >> machine-readable manner (or the respective order in which it wants to be >> applied), then Lilypond can actually do the required sorting and figure

Re: order of engravers

On 4/28/10 6:41 AM, "David Kastrup" wrote: > Kieren MacMillan writes: > >> Hi Graham et al, >> >>> Talking about >>> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=673 >>> problem with order of \consists >>> >>> 1) Add a sentence about default_bar_line_engraver and >>> timing_translat

Re: order of engravers

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi Graham et al, > >> Talking about >> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=673 >> problem with order of \consists >> >> 1) Add a sentence about default_bar_line_engraver and >> timing_translator (or whatever Werner was talking about on 673). I >> know

Re: order of engravers

WTM? > Based on Werner's specific problem: > Default_bar_line_engraver must come before Timing_translator > This last one is easy to determine by looking at [only] the IR: under > "defaultBarType" it says "This variable is read by [...] Timing translator”. Actually, it turns out the opposite

Re: order of engravers

Hi Graham et al, > Talking about > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=673 > problem with order of \consists > > 1) Add a sentence about default_bar_line_engraver and > timing_translator (or whatever Werner was talking about on 673). I > know we've already said "there order may

order of engravers

Talking about http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=673 problem with order of \consists On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Reviewing the situation, I'm not sure I *need* to send a patch: the Learning > [!!] page > >     >