Joe Neeman schreef:
On Wed, 10 May 2006 09:37, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Joe Neeman wrote:
On Wed, 10 May 2006 00:13, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
it's customary to add such changes to define-grobs.scm
OK, here's a patch. (I've just modified my previous ChangeLog entry. Is
that OK or should I make a
On Wed, 10 May 2006 09:37, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Joe Neeman wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 May 2006 00:13, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> >> it's customary to add such changes to define-grobs.scm
> >
> > OK, here's a patch. (I've just modified my previous ChangeLog entry. Is
> > that OK or should I make a ne
Joe Neeman wrote:
On Wed, 10 May 2006 00:13, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Joe Neeman schreef:
On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys schreef:
Joe Neeman wrote:
OK, here's another try
(and I made web successfully).
how is this possible? Did you do "make web-clean" in
On Wed, 10 May 2006 00:13, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Joe Neeman schreef:
> > On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> >> Han-Wen Nienhuys schreef:
> >>> Joe Neeman wrote:
> OK, here's another try
> >>>
> >>> (and I made web successfully).
> >>
> >> how is this possible? Did you do "
Joe Neeman schreef:
On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys schreef:
Joe Neeman wrote:
OK, here's another try
(and I made web successfully).
how is this possible? Did you do "make web-clean" in between?
I did, but I didn't notice this because it didn't cause the bu
Joe Neeman schreef:
On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:52, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Joe Neeman schreef:
On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys schreef:
Joe Neeman wrote:
OK, here's another try
(and I made web successfully).
how is this possible? Did you do "make web-clean" in
On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:52, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Joe Neeman schreef:
> > On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> >> Han-Wen Nienhuys schreef:
> >>> Joe Neeman wrote:
> OK, here's another try
> >>>
> >>> (and I made web successfully).
> >>
> >> how is this possible? Did you do "m
Joe Neeman schreef:
On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys schreef:
Joe Neeman wrote:
OK, here's another try
(and I made web successfully).
how is this possible? Did you do "make web-clean" in between?
I did, but I didn't notice this because it didn't cause the bu
On Tue, 9 May 2006 18:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys schreef:
> > Joe Neeman wrote:
> >> OK, here's another try
> >
> > (and I made web successfully).
>
> how is this possible? Did you do "make web-clean" in between?
I did, but I didn't notice this because it didn't cause the build
Han-Wen Nienhuys schreef:
Joe Neeman wrote:
OK, here's another try
(and I made web successfully).
how is this possible? Did you do "make web-clean" in between?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/lilypond$ lilypond input/typography-demo.ly
GNU LilyPond 2.9.4
Processing `input/typography-demo.ly'
Pars
Joe Neeman wrote:
OK, here's another try (and I made web successfully).
Thanks, looks good. Please apply.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
LilyPond Software Design
-- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com
___
OK, here's another try (and I made web successfully).
2006-05-08 Joe Neeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* scm/define-context-properties.scm:
* scm/define-grob-properties.scm:
* scm/define-grobs.scm:
* scm/define-music-display-methods.scm:
* scm/define-music-prop
Joe Neeman wrote:
I think it would be better to get rid of this double use, and have a
'line-break-permission which should be in spaceable-grob or perhaps
paper-column, and is controlled with BreakEvents, while there also is a
'non-musical property, part of item-interface. (a better name for
non
On Mon, 8 May 2006 04:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> there's a bit of confusion with the breakable property, because it both
> signals whether or not items are on nonmusical Paper_columns (see eg.
> the use of Item::is_breakable in separating-line-group-engraver.cc) and
> to signal whether a nonmu
Joe Neeman wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2006 12:49, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Joe Neeman wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. Are you thinking of having
multiple Events? With a BreakEvent, PageBreakEvent and PageTurnEvent we
could tweak break-permission, page-break-permission and
page-turn
On Sun, 7 May 2006 12:49, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Joe Neeman wrote:
> > I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. Are you thinking of having
> > multiple Events? With a BreakEvent, PageBreakEvent and PageTurnEvent we
> > could tweak break-permission, page-break-permission and
> > page-turn-per
Joe Neeman wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. Are you thinking of having
multiple Events? With a BreakEvent, PageBreakEvent and PageTurnEvent we could
tweak break-permission, page-break-permission and page-turn-permission
individually. Is this any nicer than having an explicit
On Sat, 6 May 2006 22:07, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Joe Neeman wrote:
> > I don't think I've explained it very well, but suppose you want to do
> > \break \noPageBreak. Then \noPageBreak needs to respect the changes made
> > by \break so there must be a symbol that means "don't change anything" to
Joe Neeman wrote:
I don't think I've explained it very well, but suppose you want to do \break
\noPageBreak. Then \noPageBreak needs to respect the changes made by \break
so there must be a symbol that means "don't change anything" to the
paper-column-engraver.
Isn't it it more straightforwa
On Fri, 5 May 2006 18:43, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Joe Neeman wrote:
> > First of all, instead of penalty, breakable and page-penalty, we now
> > have: break-penalty, break-permission
> > page-break-penalty, page-break-permission
> > page-turn-penalty, page-turn-permission
>
> sounds good.
>
> > w
Joe Neeman wrote:
On Fri, 5 May 2006 18:43, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Joe Neeman wrote:
First of all, instead of penalty, breakable and page-penalty, we now
have: break-penalty, break-permission
page-break-penalty, page-break-permission
page-turn-penalty, page-turn-permission
sounds good.
wher
On Fri, 5 May 2006 18:43, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Joe Neeman wrote:
> > First of all, instead of penalty, breakable and page-penalty, we now
> > have: break-penalty, break-permission
> > page-break-penalty, page-break-permission
> > page-turn-penalty, page-turn-permission
>
> sounds good.
>
> > w
Joe Neeman wrote:
First of all, instead of penalty, breakable and page-penalty, we now have:
break-penalty, break-permission
page-break-penalty, page-break-permission
page-turn-penalty, page-turn-permission
sounds good.
where XXX-permission can be 'allow, 'force or 'forbid.
can you drop the
This patch has 2 purposes, but they intersect in paper-column-engraver.cc so I
thought it was easier to send it as one patch.
First of all, instead of penalty, breakable and page-penalty, we now have:
break-penalty, break-permission
page-break-penalty, page-break-permission
page-turn-penalty, pag
24 matches
Mail list logo
