Hi there,
I got a bikeshed to pluck here, namely "normal users". Can we find a
different wording for that? I have no good idea right now, but I find
that my dislike for this wording does not improve.
Just use the word "users". Devs know they have other options.
Best regards,
Stefaan.
"Users should not be using this release"? No, I don't want to employ a
simple descriptive term like "user" as a caste label. That seems even
worse than "normal users".
In this context I agree it doesn't sound good. I'd reformulate the
sentence to mention that this specific release is suitab
Issue with the python midi implementation.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7016046/diff/1/scripts/midi.py
File scripts/midi.py (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7016046/diff/1/scripts/midi.py#newcode69
scripts/midi.py:69: (0x07, "CUE_POINT"),
Missing support for meta event 0x08? ("PROGRAM
Missing support for meta event 0x08? ("PROGRAM CHANGE")
sorry that should be "PROGRAM NAME"
my bad,
Stefaan.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
This looks super interesting!
Thanks for sharing.
Stefaan.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
ing through your
first pieces...
Best regards,
Stefaan Himpe.
___
Lilypond-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
foo = \notes { c'8( d') e'( f') g'4( a') }
\score {
\notes {
\foo
{
Stem.thickness = 4
Slur.transparent = true
\foo
}
\foo
}
}
David,
I too believe that syntax can be made much more
simple and have more uniform look and feel
wit
> I think that is a good idea, because there would then be a proof of
> concept to show to developers. I think what has happened is that the
> developers have concentrated on features and output. That is great,
> because the output is pretty impressive. They did not think about
> language desig
