On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 1:06 AM, lemzw...@googlemail.com wrote:
Are you going to report the number of errors using the `errors'
variable? In case this is true, I would consider this a bad idea, since
you abuse the functionality of the exit status.
How large can `errors' become? The value
Reviewers: janek,
Message:
On 2012/10/05 14:46:09, janek wrote:
please provide usage example(s). I suppose i like this idea, but
without
examples i don't know what exactly will be possible, and what won't be
possible.
Is it enough to say that after
unHideNotes = \un\hideNotes
oneVoice =
I think I would prefer to name this function \undo.
This more accurately expresses what it does:
\undo\voiceOne reverses everything that \voiceOne
does, or did. The action of \un\voiceOne is not
so intuitively obvious, nor does it make an English
work or phrase.
\reverse would be an
Le 6 oct. 2012 à 09:10, d...@gnu.org a écrit :
Reviewers: janek,
Message:
On 2012/10/05 14:46:09, janek wrote:
please provide usage example(s). I suppose i like this idea, but
without
examples i don't know what exactly will be possible, and what won't be
possible.
Is it enough to say
On 2012/10/06 07:44:51, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I think I would prefer to name this function \undo.
This more accurately expresses what it does:
\undo\voiceOne reverses everything that \voiceOne
does, or did. The action of \un\voiceOne is not
so intuitively obvious, nor does it make an English
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:10 AM, d...@gnu.org wrote:
Is it enough to say that after
unHideNotes = \un\hideNotes
oneVoice = \un\voiceOne
you would not notice a difference? \un\omit StringNumber will revert the
effect of \omit StringNumber.
That's what i expected. Are there any limitations?
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:10 AM, d...@gnu.org wrote:
Is it enough to say that after
unHideNotes = \un\hideNotes
oneVoice = \un\voiceOne
you would not notice a difference? \un\omit StringNumber will revert the
effect of \omit StringNumber.
Just a musing
I think the case shown below would perfectly qualify for could you
write a documentation patch for this? it can be done with a web
interface, instructions are here - if we had the web interface.
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com wrote:
On
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Are there any limitations? For example,
would \un\clef and \un\key result in
- reverting to previous clef/key
- something strange
- syntax error
Something strange is most likely. \set does not really maintain a
stack, so
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Are there any limitations? For example,
would \un\clef and \un\key result in
- reverting to previous clef/key
- something strange
- syntax error
Something strange is most
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Thomas Morley
thomasmorle...@googlemail.com wrote:
2012/10/5 janek.lilyp...@gmail.com:
It just occured to me: is there any way to specify different span bar
lines (at the end of the line and at the beginning of the line)?
Marc and me, we discussed this some
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
I think it would be good to polish this, so that this either works or
always produces syntax error.
Figuring out heuristics when or when one should not issue a warning is
not all
On 2012/10/06 07:44:51, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I think I would prefer to name this function \undo.
This more accurately expresses what it does:
\undo\voiceOne reverses everything that \voiceOne
does, or did. The action of \un\voiceOne is not
so intuitively obvious, nor does it make an English
Hello,
On 6 October 2012 09:51, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com wrote:
Just a musing
I think the case shown below would perfectly qualify for could you
write a documentation patch for this? it can be done with a web
interface, instructions are here - if we had the web interface.
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
I think it would be good to polish this, so that this either works or
always produces syntax error.
Figuring out heuristics when
- Original Message -
From: John Mandereau john.mander...@gmail.com
To: philehol...@googlemail.com
Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 3:13 AM
Subject: Re: Patchy email from PhilH
This email looks like you're using an old revision of Patchy; in case it
doesn't
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:34 AM, James pkx1...@gmail.com wrote:
How is a web interface easier than email to enter information?
I should've been more specific. I meant a web interface that would
not only allow entering information, but also handle the patch - a
formal patch, not just a
I'm currently building 2.17.4 and plan to upload it tonight and have it
available tomorrow. Please use 2.17.5 for claiming fixes on the issues list
from now.
--
Phil Holmes
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Am 06.10.2012 11:23, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Thomas Morley
thomasmorle...@googlemail.com wrote:
2012/10/5 janek.lilyp...@gmail.com:
It just occured to me: is there any way to specify different span bar
lines (at the end of the line and at the beginning of the
Am 30.09.2012 22:03, schrieb d...@gnu.org:
On 2012/09/30 19:44:49, marc wrote:
Am 30.09.2012 11:02, schrieb d...@gnu.org:
[...]
First, the define-public is asking for trouble. You are exposing an
internal Scheme data structure to users and make it overwritable by
the
user. If the user
Am 05.10.2012 18:34, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
Hi all,
i find it hard to keep up with our GLISS discussions. I've also heard
that the amount of technical details, digressions and
multithreadedness stops some people from participating, as they
don't have enough time to read long conversations
Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de writes:
Am 30.09.2012 22:03, schrieb d...@gnu.org:
On 2012/09/30 19:44:49, marc wrote:
Am 30.09.2012 11:02, schrieb d...@gnu.org:
[...]
First, the define-public is asking for trouble. You are exposing an
internal Scheme data structure to users and make it
On 2012-10-06 06:33, lemzw...@googlemail.com wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/6584073/diff/1/python/book_latex.py
File python/book_latex.py (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6584073/diff/1/python/book_latex.py#newcode88
python/book_latex.py:88: \\iffalse.*\\fi))''',
On 2012/10/06
Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de writes:
Am 05.10.2012 18:34, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
i find it hard to keep up with our GLISS discussions. I've also
heard that the amount of technical details, digressions and
multithreadedness stops some people from participating, as they
don't have enough time
Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@fam.tuwien.ac.at writes:
On 2012-10-06 06:33, lemzw...@googlemail.com wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/6584073/diff/1/python/book_latex.py#newcode88
python/book_latex.py:88: \\iffalse.*\\fi))''',
As David has commented on the list, I would prefer if you
On 10/06/2012 11:34 AM, James wrote:
How is a web interface easier than email to enter information?
Well, the problem with simple doc patches is that to submit them to Lilypond you
have to go through the same procedure as if you were submitting a code patch,
which means uploading to Riedveld
On 10/05/2012 09:31 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
It is easier to keep the order straight if you write a 5:4 tuplet
as \tuplet 5/4 {}
Is there any reason why you couldn't write \tuplet 5:4 {} ... ? Keeps exact
match between musical and Lilypond syntax and avoids the potential mental block
of
Joseph Rushton Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net writes:
On 10/05/2012 09:31 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
It is easier to keep the order straight if you write a 5:4 tuplet
as \tuplet 5/4 {}
Is there any reason why you couldn't write \tuplet 5:4 {} ... ?
Yes. 5/4 is an item that the parser is
Hello,
On 6 October 2012 15:23, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net wrote:
On 10/06/2012 11:34 AM, James wrote:
How is a web interface easier than email to enter information?
Well, the problem with simple doc patches is that to submit them to Lilypond
you have to go
On 10/06/2012 04:46 PM, James wrote:
Says someone who evidently has never built, submitted or tested 'doc'
patches for LP.
Er ... yes, I have. Actually my objections to having to use git-cl were based
on my experience of trying to submit a simple, small doc patch that I'd built
and tested.
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Rushton Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net
To: James pkx1...@gmail.com
Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: [talk] why it'd be great to have web interface for
submittingsimple doc patches
On 10/06/2012
On 10/06/2012 05:21 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
Unfortunately, testing that docs compile cleanly takes about 15 times as long as
code, so it's not for the underpowered or faint hearted. Used to be 2 3/4 hours
on my virtual machine.
Yes, true. The from-scratch build time for docs is pretty hefty,
On 05/10/12 08:10, James wrote:
Hello,
On 5 October 2012 00:19, Ian Hulin i...@hulin.org.uk wrote:
This is a proposal to move the triplet/tuplet discussion forward.
There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
current \times command.
1. \tuplet n/m {music
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Rushton Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net
To: Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net
Cc: James pkx1...@gmail.com; lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: [talk] why it'd be great to have web interface for
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
Says someone who evidently has never built, submitted or tested 'doc'
patches for LP.
Joseph Wakeling (12):
Extended documentation on Turkish classical music and Makam.
Turkish classical music corrections.
Turkish classical music documentation
On 10/06/2012 05:46 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
As you say, compile-edit-compile cycles are shorter than the full build, but can
occasionally not reveal errors, so for a proper test it's always better to nuke
the build directory and rebuild from scratch.
Out of curiosity, what kind of errors? I
On 05/10/12 08:47, David Kastrup wrote:
Ian Hulin i...@hulin.org.uk writes:
1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction,
i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you
were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c , or
invert it as \tuplet 3/2 {c8 c
Ian Hulin i...@hulin.org.uk writes:
On 05/10/12 08:47, David Kastrup wrote:
Ian Hulin i...@hulin.org.uk writes:
1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction,
i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you
were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c
Thanks to everyone for their feedback so far.
Here is Version 2 of the proposal.
There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
current \times command.
1. \tuplet n/m {music expression}
% does what \times does, but not so easily confused with \time
% command.
2. \triplet
Ian Hulin i...@hulin.org.uk writes:
Thanks to everyone for their feedback so far.
Here is Version 2 of the proposal.
There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
current \times command.
1. \tuplet n/m {music expression}
% does what \times does, but not so easily
So, your opinion is that lilypond-book SHOULD process the
\lilypond{...} code inside the \iffalse section and spectacularly
fail.
It is debatable how much plain TeX code should be used at all in a
LaTeX document. Just think of a latex-html translation.
With my colleagues, I have never seen
LGTM now.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6610058/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
I haven't seen quadruplets in the wild, so that seems like a
stretch.
They are quite common in late-romantic piano music.
When they occur, it seems audacious to assume they are 6/4. More
likely than not, I would expect them to be 3/4, like if you have 4
notes on a halfmeasure in a 6/8
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
I haven't seen quadruplets in the wild, so that seems like a
stretch.
They are quite common in late-romantic piano music.
When they occur, it seems audacious to assume they are 6/4. More
likely than not, I would expect them to be 3/4, like if you have 4
The normal setting is to have four notes in a full 3/4 bar.
That would be \times 3/4 rather than \times 6/4, right?
Exactly.
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
The normal setting is to have four notes in a full 3/4 bar.
That would be \times 3/4 rather than \times 6/4, right?
Exactly.
four quarters, yes; four eigths are 6/4, and that's what I've seen.
regarding the \tuplet integer shorthand: I would hate \tuplet n
meaning not \tuplet n/1 but
Benkő Pál benko@gmail.com writes:
The normal setting is to have four notes in a full 3/4 bar.
That would be \times 3/4 rather than \times 6/4, right?
Exactly.
four quarters, yes; four eigths are 6/4, and that's what I've seen.
regarding the \tuplet integer shorthand: I would hate
21:58:02 (UTC) Begin LilyPond compile, previous commit at
c3656fce28382903c7d2c18500f74e624e4a
21:58:12 From git.savannah.gnu.org:/srv/git/lilypond
* [new tag] release/2.17.4-1 - release/2.17.4-1
21:58:12 Another instance (PID 29551) is already running.
22:29:01 Merged staging,
Trevor--
This looks great to me. I like the reordering, and I think the
explanations are very clear.
I've tweaked the curves a little in the examples (do what you like with
my suggestions!), but otherwise:
LGTM.
On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 12:03:40PM +0200, Janek Warchoł wrote:
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:34 AM, James pkx1...@gmail.com wrote:
How is a web interface easier than email to enter information?
I should've been more specific. I meant a web interface that would
not only allow entering
On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 02:43:48PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de writes:
Am 05.10.2012 18:34, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
i find it hard to keep up with our GLISS discussions. I've also
heard that the amount of technical details, digressions and
multithreadedness
51 matches
Mail list logo
