Re: automatic setting of `currentBarNumber'

Le 23 janv. 09 à 07:19, Werner LEMBERG a écrit : #(define lastBarNumber 10) \score { \relative { c1 | d1 | e1 | f1 | \applyContext #(lambda (x) (set! lastBarNumber (ly:context-property x 'currentBarNumber))) } The procedure argument of \applyContext is applied when th

Re: Debugging/showing internal stuff?

Le 10 mars 09 à 10:22, David Kastrup a écrit : As some sort of progress, '#{ \notemode { c e g } #} puts out (let ((parser-clone (ly:parser-clone parser))) (parse-string-result " \\notemode { c e g } " parser-clone)) but since parser is #f, without quoting one gets ERROR: In procedure l

Re: Debugging/showing internal stuff?

Le 13 mars 09 à 18:36, Ian Hulin a écrit : Hi Nicolas, So how do you do interactive debugging if you're trying to write (or modify) Scheme code for Lilypond. I'd be interested to know as an apprentice Frog. you can try that: -foo.ly- #(module-define! (resolve-module '(guile-user)

Re: good news for my PhD

Le 20 mars 09 à 00:38, John Mandereau a écrit : 2) I might organize European vacations around other lilypond contributors, starting with a weekend in Paris. (not because I particularly want to see Paris -- I spent four days there about 10 years ago, so I figure that I've seen everything worth

Re: tab characters in the source code

Le 7 avr. 09 à 23:28, Carl D. Sorensen a écrit : LilyPond programming standards call for no tabs in the files. Wrong. All source files are "C-x h M-x tabify"ed. ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/li

Re: Writing out a table of contents to a file

Le 11 avr. 09 à 00:01, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : [...] However, I would rather get the page information into latex's TOC instead and for this I need to write out the TOC entries to a separate file, preferrably in the form page-number, "section", 1, title, toc-label for each entry (sinc

Re: \RemoveEmptyStaffContext question...

Le 23 avr. 09 à 10:18, ArnoWaschk a écrit : is there a way to tell lilypond in a bigger score to keep - while generally using \removeemptystaffcontext - certain staffs unhidden, no matter whether they actualy contain music or not? You can mark a specific staff to be removable with: \new

Re: [PATCH] Re: where to put useful lists in the docs?

Le 30 mai 09 à 10:20, Mark Polesky a écrit : Here's another useful set of procedures that is not in lily-library.scm. These functions make quick work of calculating offsets, extents, bounding-boxes, etc. Here's a new patch that also incorporates conditionals. ;; defines 14 functions: ;; pair

Re: proposals for LM B. Scheme tutorial

Le 20 juin 09 à 22:17, Mark Polesky a écrit : ***new paragraph and example: Multiple consecutive scheme expressions in a music file can be combined using the *begin* operator. This reduces the number of hash marks to one. However, within such a combined expression, LilyPond comments ("%" and "%{

Re: proposals for LM B. Scheme tutorial

Le 20 juin 09 à 23:18, Mark Polesky a écrit : Nicolas Sceaux wrote: #(begin (define foo 0) (define bar 1) ) The formatting is bad. #(begin (define foo 0) (define bar 1)) Parentheses are never left alone on a line. I respectfully* disagree: http://community.schemewiki.org

Re: markup?/markup-list? -> ly:markup?/ly:markup-list?

Le 25 juil. 09 à 20:19, Mark Polesky a écrit : So, is there any reason that it's "markup?" and not "ly:markup?". Ditto with "markup-list?". The ly: prefix was supposed to be used for functions defined in the C++ part, which markup? and markup-list? are not. Nicolas

Re: tabs vs. spaces in source code

Le 27 juil. 09 à 17:16, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit : On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 5:30 AM, Graham Percival wrote: On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 06:15:31PM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote: Thanks, Neil. My editor does confusing things with tabs. I hate them. Who would object if I just started running tabs->space

Re: Creating books with Scheme

Le 14 août 09 à 21:40, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Apparently Nicolas' commit da383997e929d8301424e9d320e3f5ada7cf6a58 two years ago (yeah, a long time ago, but I hadn't use that functionality until today, when I had to create dozens of exampl

Re: Creating books with Scheme

Le 17 août 09 à 02:41, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : Hmm, to me it seems that you are effectively calling the parser to interpret \include "file.ly". That is a nice way around my problem, where only the parser seems to have a pointer to the current book (so you are invoking the parser to in

Re: Creating books with Scheme

Le 17 août 09 à 09:23, Nicolas Sceaux a écrit : Le 17 août 09 à 02:41, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : Hmm, to me it seems that you are effectively calling the parser to interpret \include "file.ly". That is a nice way around my problem, where only the parser seems to have a poin

Re: LilyPond strings and \markup

Le 18 août 09 à 12:16, John Mandereau a écrit : Le lundi 17 août 2009 à 14:26 -0700, Graham Percival a écrit : Besides, if somebody's setting a list, they already have to know to remove the #' from the #'(1.0 -2.3) when putting it into scheme. (1.0 -2.3) is not a list (1.0 -2.3) does not ev

Re: identifiers with numbers? (was Re: hash/backslash confusion)

Le 18 août 09 à 06:18, Mark Polesky a écrit : Wait a second, then why can't we just do something like this: 143 NOTECOMMAND \\({A}|{N}|[-_])+ I'm sure I don't have it quite right, but it's the idea I'm interested in. Then we could do this: "violin1" = { c''4 } "violin2" = { c'4 } \score

Re: [PATCH] Re: Creating books with Scheme

Le 18 août 09 à 19:41, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : Thanks a lot, that's really cool. I hope you dont mind if I add this to the LSR? Be my guest :-) BTW, toplevel scores are printed twice... [...] I found out that this seems to be a small but in ly/init.ly file, as the scores are added t

Re: shouldn't \table-of-contents be "builtin"?

Le 19 août 09 à 06:57, Mark Polesky a écrit : Can I change the \table-of-contents markup-command defintion (ly/toc-init.ly, line 34) fromdefine-markup-list-command to define-builtin-markup-list-command ? No. `define-builtin-markup*-command' is for markup command definition in the (lily) sche

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

Le 27 août 09 à 22:38, Neil Puttock a écrit : 2009/8/26 Carl Sorensen : The patch looks good to me. Cheers. You code the empty list as (list). I typically code the empty list as '(). It there a preference? I suspect that we ought to be consistent, although it's not highly important.

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

Le 29 août 09 à 06:56, David Kastrup a écrit : Carl Sorensen writes: On Aug 28, 2009, at 1:16 PM, "Nicolas Sceaux" wrote: According to R5RS, it is an error to modify a literal list. If a function returns '(), the caller won't be allowed to apply a modifying functi

Re: Creating books with Scheme

Le 29 août 09 à 14:28, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Montag, 17. August 2009 12:05:23 schrieb Nicolas Sceaux: Le 17 août 09 à 09:23, Nicolas Sceaux a écrit : If you look at the definition of `bookpart-score-handler' in my file, you see

Re: [PATCH] Re: Creating books with Scheme

Le 30 août 09 à 03:20, Carl Sorensen a écrit : On 8/29/09 7:01 PM, "Reinhold Kainhofer" wrote: You mean something like this patch: http://codereview.appspot.com/112044 LGTM. Just a question. In your regression test, you first define (add-one- score #f), then you set! it to a

Re: Calling functions defined in a .scm file in a .ly file

Le 30 août 09 à 14:44, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : I'm struggling with how to access a function that is define- public'ed in an scm file. In particular, the file define-music-display-methods.scm defines the note-name->lily-string function to return a human-readable representation of the giv

Re: Calling functions defined in a .scm file in a .ly file

Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : > is it okay to change note-name->lily-string (and octave->lily-string) to > define-public instead, so e.g. debugging statements can print out the human- > readable pitch name? I guess nobody will object. ___ lilypond-dev

Re: \smallCaps is a copy of \caps [?!]

Le 8 sept. 09 à 14:43, Kieren MacMillan a écrit : Hello all, 1. Can anyone explain the logic behind the decision to make \smallCaps and \caps do the same thing? \caps used to change the font shape to caps, which is available in eg ccm, but not in CenturySchoolBook. So when the later was the

Re: defining an \uppercase markup function

Le 9 sept. 09 à 15:58, Kieren MacMillan a écrit : The problem is, something like \markup \uppercase \fromproperty #'header:title fails. In general, I'd rather have the syntax be \markup \uppercase { "test } instead of \markup \uppercase #"test" There is currently no workaround to this

Markuplines spacing broken: how to set a line padding?

Hi, What is the new way of setting the next padding and spacing of an individual line (a markup line in that case)? I am asking because there is a regression regarding markup lines: they used to be densely spaced, with no extra space between lines, but now they are stretched, which is no

Re: Markuplines spacing broken: how to set a line padding?

Le 18 oct. 09 à 20:34, Joe Neeman a écrit : Does (or did) this really have the effect described in the comment? It seems to me that this would have used extent-based spacing, so the lines o y l would be unevenly spaced. This was solved by using an appropriate markup list command

Re: line breaks and broken beams

Le 28 oct. 09 à 08:37, David Kastrup a écrit : Carl Sorensen writes: Isn't the problem that beams create melismata in vocal music, and you don't want to have a line break in the middle of a melisma? Baroque melisme can go on for lines. Do we have a way to discourage breaks but not complete

Re: What is the deal with define-internal-markup-command?

Le 12 nov. 2009 à 20:45, David Kastrup a écrit : Why does define-internal-markup-command have more arguments than define-markup-command? I think you mean define-builtin-markup-command. One is the doc, but there also seem to be default properties. Why doesn't define-markup-command have prop

Issue #768 - chord repetition shortcut: patch for review

Hi, Here is patch implementing the chord repetition shortcut that has been discussed a few times, for review: I've chosed arbitrary defaults, which may be changed: - the shortcut is `q'; - the function copying the previous chord only copies the chord pit

Re: [PATCH] Strings as markup arguments in music functions

Le 12 nov. 2009 à 23:02, Neil Puttock a écrit : Hi all, Though strings are valid markup objects according to the type predicate `markup?', the parser only recognizes full_markup objects as valid for music functions, which means it's currently impossible to pass both strings and markups unless u

Re: Issue #768 - chord repetition shortcut: patch for review

Le 13 nov. 2009 à 13:25, David Kastrup a écrit : Kieren MacMillan writes: Since the patch (as I understand it) ensures that q does not duplicate anything except the notes, q allows for 8-. q-^ q-. q-^ etc., right? Obviously, this would *not* be possible with something like 4*8

Re: Code formatter

Le 13 nov. 2009 à 20:01, Werner LEMBERG a écrit : > >> The rules are already defined (albeit unsatisfactorily in my opinion): >> >> Do whatever emacs does. > > Then, for goodness' sake, why not write a small elisp program to use > Emacs in batch mode on the command line (yes, this is possible)

Re: Issue #768: Chord repetition shortcut

On 2009/11/12 21:40:37, Carl wrote: Nicolas, It looks great! Thanks. I have just a couple of suggestions for changes to the documentation I've addressed your remarks concerning documentation in a new patch http://codereview.appspot.com/154056

Re: Issue #768: Chord repetition shortcut

On 2009/11/12 21:40:37, Carl wrote: http://codereview.appspot.com/154056/diff/1/10#newcode1 ly/chord-repetition-init.ly:1: \version "2.13.8" Just a question. Why do this in a .ly file instead of in a .scm file? This initializes the parser object, and thus shall be placed in a .ly file, where

Re: A few questions regarding markup

Le 14 nov. 2009 à 09:29, David Kastrup a écrit : > Now the harp-pedal command defines the property signature > > ((size 1.0) > (harp-pedal-details) > (thickness 0.5)) > > So far, so fine. It > then calls make-harp-pedal without passing it those let-bound > variables. As far as I understan

Re: A few questions regarding markup

Le 16 nov. 2009 à 20:32, David Kastrup a écrit : > With very few exceptions (about 2 or 3, one being the harp-pedal code), > all the commands appear to use the let-binding mechanism. Indeed, when I introduced the property binding thing I changed consistently all markup command definitions. But i

Re: [PATCH 1/2] scm/define-markup-commands.scm: remove some unnecessary lookups

Le 17 nov. 2009 à 19:00, Carl Sorensen a écrit : > David, > > I appreciate your work on this. > > However, I am *not* in favor of moving in this direction to solve the > problems you correctly identified. > > In my mind, the *last* thing we need is another opaque interface in > LilyPond, where

Re: [PATCH 1/2] scm/define-markup-commands.scm: remove some unnecessary lookups

Le 21 nov. 2009 à 17:32, David Kastrup a écrit : > Carl Sorensen writes: > >> I still don't like the divergence between define-markup-command and >> define-internal-markup-command. > > Agree. I think define-internal-markup-command makes for more readable > code. If we can consider define-inte

Re: [PATCH 1/2] scm/define-markup-commands.scm: remove some unnecessary lookups

Le 22 nov. 2009 à 00:00, David Kastrup a écrit : > >> I'd be insterested to see an implementation of a single >> `define-markup-command' for builtin and user defined markups, where >> user defined commands do not pollute the (lily) module, and still are >> available across file includes. > > Ther

Doc: improve doc on markup command writing (issue157133)

Reviewers: , Message: Hi, This patch improves (as I hope) the documentation on markup command definition, by using more complete examples. It also tries to address an issue that was raised on -devel, concerning the different syntax between built-in and user-defined markup command definition. A

Re: Doc: improve doc on markup command writing (issue157133)

Thank you Ian for the careful review. Nicolas http://codereview.appspot.com/157133/diff/1/2 File Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/157133/diff/1/2#newcode1045 Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely:1045: The @code{layout} a

Re: Doc: improve doc on markup command writing (issue157133)

Le 22 nov. 2009 à 17:10, Graham Percival a écrit : > On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 3:37 PM, wrote: >> As I'm not (obviously) a native English speaker, comments on style are >> most welcome. > > Whenever I try to publish my comments, I get a 500 server error. :( > I'll summarize them below: > - use @

Re: Doc: improve doc on markup command writing (issue157133)

Le 23 nov. 2009 à 03:23, Carl Sorensen a écrit : > > I think that what Graham meant was you should use @var{props} instead of > `props'. Yes, I've finally understood what Graham meant, but after I've sent that stupid message :) ___ lilypond-devel ma

Re: [PATCH 3/4] Make define-builtin-markup{, -list}-command #:category #:properties keywords

Le 23 nov. 2009 à 01:03, David Kastrup a écrit : > The specification of category and properties makes the *-builtin-* > variants diverge syntactically from the user specified markup. Moving > those specifications into keyword arguments makes the builtin defining > macros upwards compatible with t

Re: [PATCH 3/4] Make define-builtin-markup{, -list}-command #:category #:properties keywords

Le 23 nov. 2009 à 22:05, David Kastrup a écrit : > > There is no clue just _how_ one should answer the questions or what they > mean. Oh please... If you had read the git-cl README, which gives the complete sequence, instead of writing (one more time) a lengthy useless mail, then the patch would

Re: What's the deal with the module system?

Le 23 nov. 2009 à 19:03, David Kastrup a écrit : > Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 1:21 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> lilypond a.ly b.ly we want to reuse the built-in definitions, without changes effected in a.ly leaking into the processing of b.ly >>

Re: What's the deal with the module system?

2009/11/24 David Kastrup > > > file3.ly: > > myInclude = > > #(define-music-function (parser location file) (string?) > > #{ \include $file #} > > (make-music 'void #t)) > > > > \myInclude "file2.ly" > > \markup \foo > Please ignore this case, it's broken. What I had in mind a

Re: Doc: improve doc on markup command writing (issue157133)

Le 24 nov. 2009 à 17:51, d...@gnu.org a écrit : > It would make sense to apply http://codereview.appspot.com/160048> > first and make this patch work on top of that. > > There may be cases where a separate property-bind like this is useful in > called routines, and the markup commands from the me

Re: Make define-builtin-markup{,-list}-command #:category #:properties keywords (issue160048)

Hi, Maybe this patch, as a first step, should focus on the unification of the syntax of the two macros? (define-markup-command (command-name layout props . arguments) arguments-signature #:properties property-bindings #:allow-other-keys #:rest body) on the user side and: (define-builti

Re: [GLISS] Syntax of \parallelMusic

Le 29 nov. 2009 à 16:15, Alexander Kobel a écrit : > I propose using a different separator for \parallelMusic than "|", and allow > to include bar checks in there. > > \parallelMusic as is is very fine and handy, but sometimes you want to enter > a whole phrase of two or three measures in a sin

Chord repetition: \relative mode (issue164096)

Reviewers: , Message: Hi, Here is a patch to make chord repetition work in \relative mode. As I'm not sure how exactly music translation works, might someone comment the RepeatedChord music type definition, and the relative callback? In particular, I don't know what the RepeatedChord types prope

Re: Chord repetition: \relative mode (issue164096)

Le 3 déc. 2009 à 13:26, Valentin Villenave a écrit : > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:56 AM, wrote: >> Here is a patch to make chord repetition work in \relative mode. > > You forgot the link: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=164096 The link really is

Re: Make define-builtin-markup{,-list}-command #:category #:properties keywords (issue160048)

Hi, When defining a user markup command, it would be better not to modify at all the variables from the (lily) module, even if you took care of the memory leak. Also, there is one file to be deleted, and the associated \include to be removed from an init .ly file. Nicolas http://codereview.app

Re: Make define-builtin-markup{, -list}-command #:category #:properties keywords (issue160048)

Le 5 déc. 2009 à 09:48, d...@gnu.org a écrit : > Currently I don't see a better way forward than using a special command > line option, something like -dindex-markup on documentation runs. As > far as I can see, everything else would come too late in the load order. > Nicolas' proposal to only i

Re: severe chord repetition problem

Le 6 déc. 2009 à 06:28, Werner LEMBERG a écrit : > > Please see #924. This one is fixed. Concerning chord repetition, the issues that have been raised are: - \relative mode A patch is available for review at If nobody objects I'll commit it within a few d

Re: severe chord repetition problem

Le 6 déc. 2009 à 13:09, Alexander Kobel a écrit : > I'm not sure, though, if such a policy-based version is possible via Scheme > (read: at runtime), since it seems to affect the parser. This is what I was beginning to think about. I will introduce a new customizable function for the memorizatio

Re: Chord repetition: \relative mode (issue164096)

Hi, I've uploaded a second patch set, which introduces a chord memorization function. When dealing with a simple_chord_element (simple notes, rests, etc) or a note_chord_element (chord with several notes), the parser updates the memorized chord by calling a user-settable memorization function (s

Re: Chord repetition: \relative mode (issue164096)

Le 6 déc. 2009 à 20:30, d...@gnu.org a écrit : > I think it is the wrong way to go if notes can only be guessed if you > know what user-settable memorization function is in effect. We should > not sacrifice readability for the sake of saving a few keystrokes. This is a valid objection, but which

Behaviour of chord repetition in \relative mode

Hi, I'm taking into account remarks from previous discussions regarding chord repetition. In particular, I've get rid off the user-settable memorization function: only chords (with angle brackets) are memorized. This should be the more useful to users, and at the same time easy enough for LilyPon

Re: Behaviour of chord repetition in \relative mode

Le 12 déc. 2009 à 16:00, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : > Am Samstag, 12. Dezember 2009 13:29:57 schrieb Nicolas Sceaux: >> In particular, I've get rid off the user-settable >> memorization function: only chords (with angle brackets) are memorized. >> This should be the mo

Re: Behaviour of chord repetition in \relative mode

Le 12 déc. 2009 à 14:01, David Kastrup a écrit : > > { G4 g D // | /// // / // | \time 3/4 G g / | D // // | /// // // | } Memorizing more than one chord/note (e.g. 3 chords/notes), and accessing them using q, qq, qqq, would do it? ___ lilypond-devel

Re: Behaviour of chord repetition in \relative mode

Le 13 déc. 2009 à 11:05, David Kastrup a écrit : >> If in an existing score I later replace a q with an explicit chord all >> the following q, qq and qqq will need changing too. > > Yes. But q, qq, and qqq are not intended for use all across the score, > but rather in confined places. I am not

Re: Make define-builtin-markup{,-list}-command #:category #:properties keywords (issue160048)

On 2009/12/17 11:23:04, dak wrote: Well, patch set 7 does that, but after rethinking this, I suppose I'd call it a mistake. Even if the option gets implemented for other constructs than markup, the time and memory savings are likely negligible. Checking for the option is likely causing m

Re: Build failure on OS X: "error: template class without a name"

Le 15 déc. 2009 à 07:20, Patrick McCarty a écrit : > On 2009-12-14, Harmath Dénes wrote: >> On 2009.12.13., at 20:31, Patrick McCarty wrote: >> >>> 2009/12/12 Harmath Dénes : And yes, this solved the problem! You're right, flex is among the dependencies. Concluding it, I think two

Re: [PATCH] Nested properties in the \paper block

Le 2 janv. 2010 à 11:57, Joe Neeman a écrit : > Any objections/comments? If not, I'll push in the next few days. Please do, it looks good and is indeed more convenient. > > Cheers, > Joe > > On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 21:52 -0800, Joe Neeman wrote: >> http://codereview.appspot.com/182042/show >> >

Re: #'header:title etc not defined outside \header and \paper blocks in \version 2.12.2

Le 6 janv. 2010 à 13:35, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : > >> If so it is a pity because it would be quite nice to be able >> to write things like: >> >> \tocItem \markup { \fromproperty #'header:title } > > I had the same problem a while ago, and there is a workaround to make header > fields avai

Re: changes to Clef

Le 31 janv. 2010 à 12:50, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : > Before ~1800, the G clef was mainly used for violins, while all choral voices > and > most other instruments used either a C-clef of the bass clef, thus in > German, it is now usually called the "Violin-Schlüssel". The English name > "tr

Re: Scheme engraver structure questions

Le 9 févr. 2010 à 14:42, David Kastrup a écrit : > I find that syntax tiresome to read. It requires evaluation and thus > does not have a close correspondence to print syntax. > > That's partly because of the way the Scheme engraver example has been > written. > > I'd much prefer it to use back

Re: Scheme engraver structure questions

Le 9 févr. 2010 à 21:32, David Kastrup a écrit : > If you really must, you should probably use make-procedure-with-setter > in order to be able to use > > (define (engraver-method engraver 'initialize) ... According to:

Markup and markup-list protocol

Le 17 févr. 2010 à 07:27, Boris Shingarov a écrit : > Another change I was thinking about, is to redesign the API contracts > around interpret-markup-list. [...] Boris, The patch you submitted seems to me as a hack making the \score markup command behaving differently from other markup commands,

Instanciable scheme engraver (issue216066)

Reviewers: , Message: Hi, This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with private instance slots. There is at least one issue that I have to solve before this is commitable, as this shows the following warning: Warning : Attempting to remove nonexisting listener. Warning : A

Re: Problems with 'q' in tablature

Le 27 févr. 2010 à 11:07, Marc Hohl a écrit : > > the 'q' functionality has changed after 2.13.11 was released. Nicolas Sceaux > pushed a patch > to remove multiple fingerings etc., but the string information should be > copied, IMHO. Precisely for the reason fingeri

Re: Problems with 'q' in tablature

Le 28 févr. 2010 à 10:18, Marc Hohl a écrit : > > This solution might be very useful for tablature users, so I propose to store > the > definition for tab-repeat-chord in scm/tablature.scm and provide a > user-friendly shortcut for switching to tab-repeat-chord, perhaps > \tabChordRepetition or s

Re: CG chapter 3, second draft

Le 28 févr. 2010 à 12:35, Graham Percival a écrit : > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 02:27:35PM -0800, Mark Polesky wrote: >> ...and hopefully the final draft. >> >> http://www.markpolesky.com/norobots/compiling_new.itexi >> http://www.markpolesky.com/norobots/compiling_new.itexi.html >> >> Please revi

Re: Instanciable scheme engraver (issue216066)

Le 21 févr. 2010 à 15:11, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit : > On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 7:10 AM, wrote: >> This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with >> private instance slots. > > Looks OK to me; maybe you'd want to pass in the context into the > function, so it can do addition

Enhancement: tabalture chord repetition (issue224082)

http://codereview.appspot.com/224082/diff/1/3 File ly/chord-repetition-init.ly (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/224082/diff/1/3#newcode51 ly/chord-repetition-init.ly:51: #(define-public (tab-repeat-chord previous-chord location duration articulations) It would be better to define a generi

Re: Instanciable scheme engraver (issue216066)

Le 28 févr. 2010 à 17:11, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit : > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Nicolas Sceaux > wrote: > >>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 7:10 AM, wrote: >>>> This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with >>>> private inst

Re: Enhancement: tabalture chord repetition (issue224082)

On 2010/02/28 16:27:07, nicolas.sceaux wrote: http://codereview.appspot.com/224082/diff/1/3 File ly/chord-repetition-init.ly (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/224082/diff/1/3#newcode51 ly/chord-repetition-init.ly:51: #(define-public (tab-repeat-chord previous-chord location duration art

Re: Enhancement: tabalture chord repetition (issue224082)

Le 1 mars 2010 à 10:00, Marc Hohl a écrit : > nicolas.sce...@gmail.com schrieb: >> >> http://codereview.appspot.com/224082/diff/1/3 >> File ly/chord-repetition-init.ly (right): >> >> http://codereview.appspot.com/224082/diff/1/3#newcode51 >> ly/chord-repetition-init.ly:51: #(define-public (tab-r

Re: Enhancement: tabalture chord repetition (issue224082)

Le 1 mars 2010 à 20:24, Marc Hohl a écrit : > Nicolas Sceaux schrieb: >> >> Shouldn't there be a few words of explantion about using q and >> \tabChordRepetition somewhere in 2.4.1 "Common notation for fretted >> strings"? >>

Re: Instanciable scheme engraver (issue216066)

Le 3 mars 2010 à 14:52, d...@gnu.org a écrit : > The use of modules oop and goops appears to me as part of a programming > practice at a different knowledge level than to be expected from the > audience of this example. > > If I rewrite the example to get along without those modules, are there >

PATCH: accessors for note-column's dot-column, accidentals

Hi, While working on a scheme engraver for adding harpsichord ornementations to note heads, I'd like to be able to shift accidentals or dots attached to notes. Is it OK to add this `lily/note-column-scheme.cc' file? note-column-scheme.patch Description: Binary data It makes it possible to ac

Re: PATCH: accessors for note-column's dot-column, accidentals

Le 4 avr. 2010 à 13:06, Neil Puttock a écrit : > On 4 April 2010 10:46, Nicolas Sceaux wrote: >> Hi, >> >> While working on a scheme engraver for adding harpsichord ornementations >> to note heads, I'd like to be able to shift accidentals or dots attached >

Re: PATCH: accessors for note-column's dot-column, accidentals

Le 4 avr. 2010 à 20:20, Joe Neeman a écrit : > On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 11:46 +0200, Nicolas Sceaux wrote: >> +LY_DEFINE (ly_note_column__accidentals, >> "ly:note-column::accidentals", >> + 1, 0, 0, (SCM note_column), >> + "Return the f

Re: music-functions: #$var1 or just $var1 ?

Le 25 avr. 2010 à 08:13, Mark Polesky a écrit : > In both: > Notation 5.6.1 "Substitution function syntax", and > Extending 2.1.2 "Simple substitution functions", > > it says that variables inside the music block part of a > music-function definition should be referenced using the > hash-cash

Re: PATCH: Doc: Reorganize music functions material.

Le 26 avr. 2010 à 19:46, Carl Sorensen a écrit : > The problem is that the #{ throws off the emacs Scheme editor (at least I > assume that's what happens). > > So there are two reasonably compliant choices for indentation. > > #(define-music-function (parser location args) >

Re: markup-command and markup-command-list signatures

Le 29 avr. 2010 à 20:27, David Kastrup a écrit : > What type signatures would be actually permissable under the assumption > that they are supported by lexer and parser? > > It is somewhat clear to me that we can't have markup-list followed by > markup in the arguments. Anything else? I'd say,

Re: emacs lilypond-mode.el and lilypond-init.el patches to process .lytex files with "lilypond-book --pdf"/"pdflatex"

Le 8 mai 2010 à 17:37, James E. Bailey a écrit : > > > On Sat, 8 May 2010, josé henrique padovani wrote: > >> Hi, >> I have made some changes on my emacs lilypond-mode files to process lytex >> files as suggested here >> (http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/usage-big-page#Invoking-li

Re: Don't hardcode a limited set of markup signatures. (issue969046)

Looks good! http://codereview.appspot.com/969046/show ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: fix ly:parser-parse-file in an ly file (issue1345041)

Le 7 juin 2010 à 21:35, reinhold.kainho...@gmail.com a écrit : > On 2010/06/07 19:17:27, Neil Puttock wrote: >> On 2010/06/07 13:59:45, Reinhold wrote: >> > However, I fail to see where this is actually used... > >> It's called whenever Guile encounters the character sequence #{ for > parsing >>

Re: Presentation: "Publisher-grade LilyPond" in Ottawa

Le 13 juin 2010 à 15:22, David Kastrup a écrit : > If the worst Boris can come up with with regard to developer attitudes > are misconstrued postings of mine (heck, I'd think I can be enough of a > problem without reverting to such tactics) or replies to them, the > situation cannot be all that ba

Re: How to develop Emacs mode?

Le 17 juin 2010 à 17:31, David Kastrup a écrit : > Carl Sorensen writes: > >> On 6/17/10 8:59 AM, "David Kastrup" wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have a question about developing Emacs input and major modes for >>> Lilypond. What would be the right way to go forward for me? >>> >>> I

Re: How to develop Emacs mode?

Le 19 juin 2010 à 14:23, David Kastrup a écrit : > It would appear pretty nonsensical for me to ignore your work on lyqi > (which, in turn, appears to be slated to replace most of the existing > lilypond-mode functionality). Indeed, I do not use LilyPond-mode anymore. > If it is compatible with

Re: How to develop Emacs mode?

Le 19 juin 2010 à 16:15, David Kastrup a écrit : > Nicolas Sceaux writes: > >> Le 19 juin 2010 à 14:23, David Kastrup a écrit : >> >>> It would appear that you work on MacOSX or so. Can you check whether >>> some variation of the Midi test code using make-

Re: RemoveEmptyStaves and \with

Le 28 juil. 2010 à 01:50, Reinhold Kainhofer a écrit : > Am Dienstag, 27. Juli 2010, um 18:19:39 schrieb Neil Puttock: > [..] >> Why don't we move its definition to a separate file (e.g., >> `context-modifications-init.ly')? I'm sure there are other mods which >> could usefully be defined (e.g.,

Re: markup.scm: Remove unused and untested aliasing functionality from define-markup{, -list}-command (issue1995042)

Le 16 août 2010 à 01:33, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com a écrit : > LGTM. > > Further info: This code has been in the file since > 114c05e7b0e992de7dbdd0958d23eb8d2ab1eaae > > (the file name at that time was scm/new-markup.scm). > > I think that the alternate syntax has never been used in the main

Re: lily gui in guile

2010/11/10 Jan Nieuwenhuizen : > I've created a GUB installer for linux-x86 > >    http://lilypond.org/schikkers-list/download/ Maybe LILYPOND_DATADIR environment variable should be set to ${INSTALLER_PREFIX}/share/lilypond/current by the main script, because otherwise, the lilypond serveur compl

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >