Hi Jeffrey and Ben,
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:13 PM, SoundsFromSound
wrote:
> I agree - you have done an amazing job with this, thank you so much!
>
> Ben
>
>
>
> Jeffrey Trevino wrote
> > Hi David,
> >
> > I really hope this ends up in Lilypond; you've clearly put a ton of work
> > into this. An
let me know if you have any
>> suggestions, or run into difficulties.
>>
> <http://www.jeffreytrevino.com/>;
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Aleatoric-modern-notation-tp18113p139671.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Hi David,
I really hope this ends up in Lilypond; you've clearly put a ton of work
into this. And it's even commented now! Brilliant.
It seems to be working just fine; I'll holler if there are troubles.
cheers,
Jeff
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 10:23 AM, David Nalesnik
wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> On Sat,
Hi Jeff,
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Jeffrey Trevino <
jeffrey.trevi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I just saw this fix. Thanks for spending so much time tweaking this. Maybe
> there's a way it can be integrated into the Lilypond code, since you've
> spent so much time developing it.
Hi David,
I just saw this fix. Thanks for spending so much time tweaking this. Maybe
there's a way it can be integrated into the Lilypond code, since you've
spent so much time developing it. I'll be using it in a score soon.
cheers,
Jeff
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 3:04 PM, David Nalesnik wrote:
>
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:21 PM, David Nalesnik wrote:
[...]
>
> Trying to work out the problem, I've done a little rewriting so I'll
> include the engraver here. You can just substitute this in the
> problematic file.
>
Well, I did break something. Here's the fix:
frameEngraver =
#(lambda (c
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:30 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> The behavior is undefined if I remember correctly: an error is not
> guaranteed by the standard. I think Guilev2 will produce an error, but
> LilyPond is still at Guilev1.
OK, thanks!
-David
_
David Nalesnik writes:
> (I'm trying an example given here:
> http://jayreynoldsfreeman.com/Aux/Tutorials/Modifying%20Lists.html)
>
> I don't understand this--because clearly using set-car! and set-cdr!
> with a constant led to problems within the engraver; why will the
> sandbox allow me to do t
David,
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 12:34 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> David Nalesnik writes:
>
>> It turns out that the my definition of event-drul as '(() . ()) was
>> the problem. I substituted (cons '() '()) and everything works just
>> fine...even with the file that gave you the issues with multip
Hi again,
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:21 AM, David Nalesnik wrote:
> Hi Jeffrey,
>
> I'm copying this to the list since I myself am not sure about something here.
>
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:13 AM, Jeffrey Trevino
> wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> Thanks for revising this more for me. I really appreciat
Hi Jeffrey,
I'm copying this to the list since I myself am not sure about something here.
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:13 AM, Jeffrey Trevino
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for revising this more for me. I really appreciate your efforts, and
> I will take a look at this asap and write back. For my le
Hi Jeffrey,
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Jeffrey Trevino
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Could someone please take a look at the latest scheme code in this thread
> and figure out how we can use this frame engraver construct on multiple
> staffs in the same score simultaneously? It's pretty important for
Hi all,
Could someone please take a look at the latest scheme code in this thread
and figure out how we can use this frame engraver construct on multiple
staffs in the same score simultaneously? It's pretty important for
preceding in my work, and I can't figure out how to get it working.
thank yo
Hi Jeffrey,
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Jeffrey Trevino
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Yes, I think it's reasonable to confine the frame to a single line, even
> though the arrow must be breakable.
>
> I'm also having problems using the construct on parallel staffs within a
> score. It works fine f
Hi David,
Yes, I think it's reasonable to confine the frame to a single line, even
though the arrow must be breakable.
I'm also having problems using the construct on parallel staffs within a
score. It works fine for a single staff, but when I try to use the same
construct on two staffs simultane
Hi Jeffrey,
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Jeffrey Trevino
wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> The box construct from this thread is working fine on my machine, but I'd
> like to know how to add one important feature to it: It's currently the case
> that the arrow isn't "breakable," i. e. if the box's entir
Hi there,
The box construct from this thread is working fine on my machine, but I'd
like to know how to add one important feature to it: It's currently the
case that the arrow isn't "breakable," i. e. if the box's entire duration
exceeds the graphic space of the first line, the arrow stops on the
Hi Jeffrey,
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:05 AM, Jeffrey Trevino
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> This is a very help description. Maybe you could describe for me: I see both
> the box duration as a spacer duration and the line duration as "extender
> length," in what seem to be unitless units.
The way it's s
re desirable. If you have any ideas, please let
> me know.
>
> Most of what's in this file (anything above the example) might be
> tucked away into a file which you include to cut down on the mess.
>
> Hope this is helpful--
> David
>
> ______
Hi David,
This is a very help description. Maybe you could describe for me: I see
both the box duration as a spacer duration and the line duration as
"extender length," in what seem to be unitless units.
Here is an addition -- although I'm not sure if it's an improvement -- that
might be importan
Hi Ben,
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:46 PM, SoundsFromSound
wrote:
> I'm trying to wrap my head around the frameEngraver4 and can't quite grasp
> the syntax and how to customize the code to suit my needs.
>
> Is there a guide or cheat-sheet that explains how to use frameEngraver to
> it's fullest po
on't
> feel like I can in good conscience offer to do non-trivial "side jobs"
> that can cause me to deadlock for longer times.
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@
>
Whoa --
It's marvelous to see such a detailed response to my question.
Most importantly, frameEngraver4 works! I will study the differences
between 3 and 4 to see what changed.
As mentioned, it seems to me that the best course of action would be to
make dynamic spanner creation a high developmen
Janek Warchoł writes:
>>> - you can pay one of the experienced developers to implement
>>> specifically this feature. But that would probably be expensive, as
>>> programming work is expensive in general. You'll probably need to
>>> find several other people willing to pay for this.
>>
>> I'm c
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> Hi,
>
> you seem to use some very strange quotation style. Please use regular
> quotation style (i.e. your text without > marks, each quotation level
> has one > more).
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM, SoundsFromSound
> wrote:
>>
>> Jan
omposer | sound designer
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Aleatoric-modern-notation-tp18113p136312.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https:
Hi,
you seem to use some very strange quotation style. Please use regular
quotation style (i.e. your text without > marks, each quotation level
has one > more).
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM, SoundsFromSound
wrote:
>
> Janek Warchoł-2 wrote
>> - contributing to Lily yourself (i.e. writing cod
>
> Ben
>
>
> cheers,
> Janek
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Aleatoric-modern-notation-tp18113p136304.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:25 AM, SoundsFromSound
wrote:
> I'll keep you posted for sure. Say, do you suppose that this boxed notation
> utility could be implemented sooner (and perhaps with more powerful
> features) in LilyPond if funding/support increased?
Well, i think the situation is like th
r, please let me know
> if you run into problems or wish it could do something it can't; I'll
> be happy to try to improve it, and possibly do this the "right way" if
> it's promising...)
>
> Best,
> David
>
> _______
Ben,
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 4:27 PM, SoundsFromSound
wrote:
> David,
>
> Thanks for the feedback! It's sad to hear that boxed notation is a bit
> challenging in LilyPond (i.e. not possible without "breaking" parts of it) -
> do you think there will ever be a native, more acceptable way to do box
k because in future scores I'll have to do something similar to this
>> and
>> want to make sure I don't corrupt my dear LilyPond install :)
>
> No, the files are safe!
>
> -David
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-use
Ben,
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 9:53 PM, SoundsFromSound
wrote:
> David:
>
> I see, thanks for clarifying that for me. So, in your opinion, if I wanted
> to use these aleatoric boxes on a few scores here and there, that would be
> doable - though not ideal, it would /work/- correct? I wouldn't ever
SoundsFromSound writes:
> Hi David,
>
> I'm a little confused. What problems was David talking about, I didn't
> follow. So we shouldn't use this boxed notation approach, or we should but
> with caveats?
One shouldn't
a) tamper with internals
b) expect the tampering to remain working in futur
> when processing files singly, or in batches (but check if there is
> anything unexpected in output).
>
> -David
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
-
composer | sound designer
--
View
Hi Ben,
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 9:00 PM, SoundsFromSound
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I'm a little confused. What problems was David talking about, I didn't
> follow. So we shouldn't use this boxed notation approach, or we should but
> with caveats?
>
As I understand it, the issue is that the file c
y>;
-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Aleatoric-modern-notation-tp18113p136170.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Aleatoric-modern-notation-tp18113p136168.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 12:42 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> That regression test tampered with internals of LilyPond in a manner
>> that broke session integrity (any changes propagated to further files
>> processed on the command line). It likely still does. The internals
>> changed in the mean
Hi Jeffrey,
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 12:42 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Jeffrey Trevino writes:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm trying to get the frameEngraver3.ly code from this aleatoric
>> notation thread going on Lilypond 2.16.0-1, and I get the following
>> errors:
>>
>> GNU LilyPond 2.16.0
>> Processi
Jeffrey Trevino writes:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm trying to get the frameEngraver3.ly code from this aleatoric
> notation thread going on Lilypond 2.16.0-1, and I get the following
> errors:
>
> GNU LilyPond 2.16.0
> Processing `frameEngraver.ly'
> Parsing...
> frameEngraver.ly:27:1: error: GUILE signale
e a list
\once \override Frame #'extender-length =
#12
...etc
-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Aleatoric-modern-notation-tp18113p136120.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Hi all,
I'm trying to get the frameEngraver3.ly code from this aleatoric notation
thread going on Lilypond 2.16.0-1, and I get the following errors:
GNU LilyPond 2.16.0
Processing `frameEngraver.ly'
Parsing...
frameEngraver.ly:27:1: error: GUILE signaled an error for the expression
beginning here
David Nalesnik writes:
> Hi Mike,
>
> Excellent work!
>
>
> I'm glad you think so!
>
>
>
> I've attached a new file that addresses some of the issues you
> identify above:
>
> --) It uses axis-group::width to box accidentals
>
>
> Beautiful! Now there's really no need
Hi David,
On 2012.03.26., at 23:05, David Nalesnik wrote:
> Hi Ádám,
>
>>
>> I tried to use the frame engraver of this thread, but I was unable to do
>> so. I'm constantly getting 'syntax error, unexpected EVENT_IDENTIFIER'
>> errors and the LilyPond compiler won't recognize the \frameStart and
Hi Ádám,
>
> I tried to use the frame engraver of this thread, but I was unable to do
> so. I'm constantly getting 'syntax error, unexpected EVENT_IDENTIFIER'
> errors and the LilyPond compiler won't recognize the \frameStart and
> \frameEnd commands. The only thing I changed was the version numbe
Hi developers,
On 2012.03.13., at 17:33, David Nalesnik wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> Excellent work!
>
>
> I'm glad you think so!
>
>
>>
>> I've attached a new file that addresses some of the issues you identify
>> above:
>>
>> --) It uses axis-group::width to box accidentals
>>
>
> Beautiful!
Hi James,
BTW, I didn't mention before, but it looks like I'm going to be using that
> feathered-beam function, derived from work by David, and this box-notation
> function, also coming from David's work.
>
Oh, I just helped out a bit with that one--thanks definitely go to Harm.
>
> So David --
At Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:33:30 -0500,
David Nalesnik wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> Excellent work!
>
> I'm glad you think so!
BTW, I didn't mention before, but it looks like I'm going to be using that
feathered-beam function, derived from work by David, and this box-notation
function, also coming fr
Hi Mike,
Excellent work!
I'm glad you think so!
>
> I've attached a new file that addresses some of the issues you identify
> above:
>
> --) It uses axis-group::width to box accidentals
>
Beautiful! Now there's really no need for the extra padding properties.
(I've kept them in the attached
On Mar 13, 2012, at 4:25 AM, David Nalesnik wrote:
> I've defined a grob, Frame, and given it several properties. One of these,
> 'padding, adds space between the frame and its contents, as you would expect.
> The length of the continuation line is controlled by the property
> 'extender-lengt
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 3:18 AM, m...@apollinemike.com <
m...@apollinemike.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 11, 2012, at 8:53 AM, James Harkins wrote:
>
> > At Sun, 11 Mar 2012 08:12:35 +0100,
> > m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> >> The best way to achieve that with current LilyPond is Scheme engravers.
At Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:40:19 +,
Carl Sorensen wrote:
> You might offer a bounty to Mike or to David Kastrup, in which case they
> would write the custom engraver for you.
Thinking about that... either monetary or a delivery from a microbrewery? :-p
This might be viable in the meantime. I alre
On Mar 11, 2012, at 8:53 AM, James Harkins wrote:
> At Sun, 11 Mar 2012 08:12:35 +0100,
> m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
>> The best way to achieve that with current LilyPond is Scheme engravers.
>>
>> There have been a few examples of Scheme engravers posted on this list (if
>> you search Scheme
On Mar 11, 2012, at 5:33 AM, James Harkins wrote:
> Possibly a common question, sorry if asked and answered before, but Google
> failed me...
>
> I'm considering some aleatoric notation (so-called "box notation") for a
> piece but couldn't find info in the manuals (the "contemporary notation"
On 3/11/12 12:53 AM, "James Harkins" wrote:
>At Sun, 11 Mar 2012 08:12:35 +0100,
>m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
>> The best way to achieve that with current LilyPond is Scheme engravers.
>>
>> There have been a few examples of Scheme engravers posted on this list
>>(if you search Scheme engraver
At Sun, 11 Mar 2012 08:12:35 +0100,
m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> The best way to achieve that with current LilyPond is Scheme engravers.
>
> There have been a few examples of Scheme engravers posted on this list (if
> you search Scheme engraver you'll find one - there are also examples in the
Possibly a common question, sorry if asked and answered before, but Google
failed me...
I'm considering some aleatoric notation (so-called "box notation") for a piece
but couldn't find info in the manuals (the "contemporary notation" section of
the 2.14.2 docs @ lilypond.org is empty), or in th
58 matches
Mail list logo
