> From what i see, the skylines are now more precise than they need to
> be - every glyph has a skyline of 10 or so boxes, even if it's a
> single letter! (see attached)
I second this.
> I think the proper solution would be to:
> a) set minimal "step" size to 0.2 staffspace (or more in case of
>
2012/3/1 Janek Warchoł :
> From what i see, the skylines are now more precise than they need to
> be - every glyph has a skyline of 10 or so boxes, even if it's a
> single letter! (see attached)
> I think the proper solution would be to:
> a) set minimal "step" size to 0.2 staffspace (or more in c
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> 2012/3/1 Janek Warchoł :
>
>> From what i see, the skylines are now more precise than they need to
>> be - every glyph has a skyline of 10 or so boxes, even if it's a
>> single letter! (see attached)
>> I think the proper solution would be to:
>> a) set minimal "step" s
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 7:57 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> From what i see, the skylines are now more precise than they need to
>>> be - every glyph has a skyline of 10 or so boxes, even if it's a
>>> single letter! (see attached)
>>> I think the proper solution would be to:
>>> a) set minimal "ste
On Mar 1, 2012, at 11:59 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>>
>> Well, it is again an issue of "incest tabu" where the details of the
>> combining skylines make best sense for combining _heterogenous_
>> elements: for arranging text with text, you don't want to have things
>> get too closely or even i
On Mar 1, 2012, at 11:52 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> 2012/3/1 Janek Warchoł :
>
>> From what i see, the skylines are now more precise than they need to
>> be - every glyph has a skyline of 10 or so boxes, even if it's a
>> single letter! (see attached)
>> I think the proper solution would be to
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> 2012/3/1 Janek Warchoł :
>
>> From what i see, the skylines are now more precise than they need to
>> be - every glyph has a skyline of 10 or so boxes, even if it's a
>> single letter! (see attached)
>> I think the proper solution would be to:
>> a) set minimal "step" s
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 7:57 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
From what i see, the skylines are now more precise than they need to
be - every glyph has a skyline of 10 or so boxes, even if it's a
single letter! (see attached)
I think the proper solution wo
Janek Warchoł wrote Thursday, March 01, 2012 12:01 AM
The bad news is that for scores containing a lot of lyrics (like my
SATB pieces) compilation times are now 3-4 times longer than wiith
master. For instrumental scores the situation look better, it's 1.5-2
times longer. I can live with thes
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 8:01 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>
>> 2012/3/1 Janek Warchoł :
>>
>>> From what i see, the skylines are now more precise than they need to
>>> be - every glyph has a skyline of 10 or so boxes, even if it's a
>>> single letter! (see attached)
>>> I th
On Mar 1, 2012, at 12:17 PM, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> Janek Warchoł wrote Thursday, March 01, 2012 12:01 AM
>
>> The bad news is that for scores containing a lot of lyrics (like my
>> SATB pieces) compilation times are now 3-4 times longer than wiith
>> master. For instrumental scores the situ
On Mar 1, 2012, at 12:23 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Well, perhaps there is another method. I just want to point out that
> it is a waste to represent the extent of the letter 'n' with 10 boxes,
> and we should be able to do better.
>
I agree that it's excessive. To me, "do better" means ma
On 28 February 2012 22:50, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> >> Mentors may or may not receive money, but they will surely win Eternal
> >> Glory (and maybe a Graham's Kiss, who knows?). Please declare which
> >> project(s) you are willing to mentor (remember that not all projects
> >> will be launched):
>
Werner LEMBERG gnu.org> writes:
> configure:9636: checking for guile
> configure:9666: result: no
> configure:9636: checking for guile1
> configure:9652: found /usr/bin/guile1
> configure:9663: result: guile1
> configure:9704: checking for guile
> configure:9737: result: no
> ...
>
On 2012/02/29 22:33:45, Julien Rioux wrote:
This patch is not associated with any issue in the bug tracker. It
will not get
a proper review until it is added there, and the automatic testing
shows that it
does not cause any unexpected problems. Should it be added to issue
1983, or is
it suf
> This should do it:
>
> - AC_PATH_PROG($1, $2)
> + AC_PATH_PROGS($1, $2)
Yep, thanks.
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 12-03-01 10:23 AM, ptrcklsch...@googlemail.com wrote:
Well it would certainly be easier for me if we opened a new issue for
this patch as it contains fixes for several bugs I reported lately. For
some of them no issues were opened. Here are the bugs / reports at
stake:
-) http://code.google.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:00 PM, m...@apollinemike.com
wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2012, at 11:52 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>> It's neat that you are generating such precise skylines, but can you
>> show places where this makes an appreciable difference for texts?
>>
>
> Janek had sent out a couple e-mai
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> We need to make more space on lilypond.org. I've deleted
> binaries, documentation, and regtests from everything other than
> the first and last release of a stable series.
On the minus side, it makes it a PITA to quickly check for
not-so
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 11:19:58PM +0100, Valentin Villenave wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Graham Percival
> wrote:
> > We need to make more space on lilypond.org. I've deleted
> > binaries, documentation, and regtests from everything other than
> > the first and last release of a sta
Reviewers: ,
Message:
I've seen it many times that Lilypond would crash during my experiments
with Scheme code. This time I decided to track it down. It's my first
ever fix to the C++ code in Lilypond, so please check my coding style.
Description:
Fix crash when unknown grob name is passed to
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> Umm, no? I mean, literally no? Other than the first+last
> releases of each stable branch, those files are gone.
Then I'm sorry to hear that. In case my honest opinion matters (hint:
it doesn't), I think you screwed up big time on this.
Valentin Villenave wrote Thursday, March 01, 2012 11:05 PM
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
Umm, no? I mean, literally no? Other than the first+last
releases of each stable branch, those files are gone.
Then I'm sorry to hear that. In case my honest opinion matters (
On 2012/03/01 23:02:57, Pavel Roskin wrote:
I've seen it many times that Lilypond would crash during my
experiments with
Scheme code. This time I decided to track it down. It's my first
ever fix to
the C++ code in Lilypond, so please check my coding style.
How is that a fix? You return a
As for compilation times with patchset 32, SATB choral files compile
two times longer than master, and instrumentals 1.0-1.5 times longer
than master.
Mike, i am very sorry but i have to pause my involvement in this issue
a bit. I'm very short on time and testing takes a lot of time :/
cheers,
Ja
Hi all,
i've got a message from GNU: they don't yet have a person who will be
their GSoC administrator. They welcome volunteers to do this task -
any takers?
If GNU won't participate in GSoC, we'll have to make an application on
our own. It's certainly possible to do so and i began investigating
On Mar 2, 2012, at 6:28 AM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> As for compilation times with patchset 32, SATB choral files compile
> two times longer than master, and instrumentals 1.0-1.5 times longer
> than master.
> Mike, i am very sorry but i have to pause my involvement in this issue
> a bit. I'm very
27 matches
Mail list logo
