On 2012/10/07 03:14:31, david.nalesnik wrote:
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!),
Thanks. I've adopted them, but with just a little further
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
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
- 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 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: [talk] why it'd be great to have web interface for
Hi,
some clarification:
Most importantly, i'm not saying that we should *force* separating
discussions about problems from discussions about solutions. What i
mean is to have a different approach than we had till now.
An example of what i consider an ineffective way of discussing:
personA:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.17.4. This
release contains the usual number of bugfixes. It is strongly
recommended that normal users do not use this release, and instead
use the stable 2.16 version.
I got a bikeshed to pluck here,
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 12:13 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.17.4. This
release contains the usual number of bugfixes. It is strongly
recommended that normal users do not use this release, and
Hi Keith,
Thanks for doing some prototyping.
On 07/10/12 00:24, Keith OHara wrote:
Ian Hulin ian at hulin.org.uk writes:
There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
current \times command.
1. \tuplet n/m {music expression}
This should be relatively easy to
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com wrote:
it is strongly recommended that only developers use this release.
Everyone else should use stable 2.16 version.
The wording I've used for the upcoming LilyPond Report is: this
version is intended for testing purposes
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 12:13 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.17.4. This
release contains the usual number of bugfixes. It is strongly
recommended
- Original Message -
From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2012 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: LilyPond 2.17.4 released
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 12:13 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes:
it is strongly recommended that only experienced users try working with
this release. Everyone else is encouraged to use the stable 2.16
version instead.
Something like that.
This version has not had extensive testing, and so only users who are
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.
Stefaan Himpe stefaan.hi...@gmail.com writes:
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
- Original Message -
From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
To: Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net
Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2012 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: LilyPond 2.17.4 released
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes:
it is strongly recommended that only experienced
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Stefaan Himpe stefaan.hi...@gmail.com wrote:
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.
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 suitable
Thanks to everyone for their feedback so far.
Here is Version 3 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
Hi,
I am trying to get into somewhat consistent music function behavior.
Some argument types for music functions inherently require lookahead:
simple music expressions like c4 (since you can still add -\accent at
will), symbol chains (like Bottom as it may be followed by
. Accidental), durations
Am 06.10.2012 22:27, schrieb Thomas Morley:
Hi,
attached are the alphabetic sorted complains/suggestions about
LilyPond-syntax from german users.
Hi Harm,
thanks for your work – looks like you spent quite a lot of time
collecting *and*
presenting these issues!
It looks like some issues
Am 05.10.2012 21:42, schrieb Thomas Morley:
2012/10/5 janek.lilyp...@gmail.com:
Marc wrote:
(define-bar-line ...) or \defineBarLine allows for new
definitions. These functions have four arguments,
namely the bar line itself, the bar line used at the end
of line, the bar line used at the begin
Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2012 20:33:18 +0200
From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [proposal] easy triplets and tuplets - Draft 2
Message-ID: 87obkfsb69@fencepost.gnu.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
I haven't seen
On 07/10/2012 5:33 AM, Phil Holmes wrote:
- 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 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: [talk] why it'd be great
Julien Rioux jri...@physics.utoronto.ca writes:
It should be possible to avoid make clean. There will be a need for
make doc-clean when moving or removing an included file. Other cases
should be considered as bugs.
_Every_ change in the scm or lily or ly directory can potentially affect
every
On 10/07/2012 05:04 PM, Ian Hulin wrote:
The design was deliberately restricted to providing
shorthands for the \times commands with 2:3 and 3:2 ratios expressed in
the n/m rational parameter, however there seemed to be a feeling that
the 5:4 ratio was just as common. (See 6. above).
Yes, it
On 2012-10-07 23:14, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
Apologies for coming late with these next remarks, but it's perhaps
worth thinking about quite how flexible a \tuplet command could be, in
respect of some of the various modern notations out there.
Just to give a flavour, besides the standard
On 10/07/2012 11:29 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=482
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=817
I implemented those functions for MusicXML import. Note, however, that lilypond
does not automatically use those, you have to manually set them as shown in the
On 2012-10-07 23:38, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 10/07/2012 11:29 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=482
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=817
I implemented those functions for MusicXML import. Note, however, that
lilypond
does not automatically use
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 8:11 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
[...]
In general, not requiring lookahead makes things more versatile.
[...]
thanks - i think i more or less understand why we prefer not to
require lookahead.
However, i'm not sure whether you are asking us for any opinion
On 10/07/2012 11:52 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
There is, however, no check whether the fraction with the durations makes
sense and matches the real tuplet (in most cases, itwill not).
Yes, that's what I mean. I'd like to see something where the fractions and
durations are all derived from
Joseph Rushton Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net writes:
[...]
Just to give a flavour, besides the standard
|-- n --|
(i.e. bracket with number), and the almost-as-standard
|- n : m -|
(i.e. ratio), you also might
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 8:11 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
[...]
In general, not requiring lookahead makes things more versatile.
[...]
thanks - i think i more or less understand why we prefer not to
require lookahead.
However,
On 10/08/2012 12:40 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
I diasagree. Whether or not you we provide separate commands actually
doing the overrides, the choice between all those variants does not
appear to convey musical information individually but just constitutes a
different choice of consistent notation
On 2012-10-08 00:21, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 10/07/2012 11:52 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
There is, however, no check whether the fraction with the durations makes
sense and matches the real tuplet (in most cases, itwill not).
Yes, that's what I mean. I'd like to see something
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 12:46 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
I am considering removing existing functionality that's not likely to
have seen any use so far, but at least is nailed down in regtests
(input/regression/optional-args-backup.ly). So I am looking for
objections.
ok. I think
For 20:00 MDT Tuesday October 9th
Documentation
Issue 2858
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2858: Document
\shape music function - R6561064 http://codereview.appspot.com/6561064/
Enhancement:
Issue 2670
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2670:
LGTM.
And thanks again for doing this!
-David
https://codereview.appspot.com/6561064/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
I lean towards letting numbers in function arguments just evaluate
to themselves, never mind units. In particular integers are used
quite often in manners where a unit behavior of identifiers would
be rather more than less surprising.
+1. However, it should be documented, together with the
LGTM
http://codereview.appspot.com/6561064/diff/10001/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely
File Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6561064/diff/10001/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely#newcode3961
Hi Team,
i have bad news: i'll be much less active for several weeks. I'm very
sorry to do this, but keeping up with my university work and other
arrangements requires this.
I hope to do some code reviews, and maybe merge some GSOC stuff, but
probably not much else. In particular, i'll be quite
http://codereview.appspot.com/6610058/diff/9001/scripts/convert-ly.py
File scripts/convert-ly.py (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6610058/diff/9001/scripts/convert-ly.py#newcode231
scripts/convert-ly.py:231: ly.progress (_ (uProcessing `%s\'... ) %
infile_name, True)
is 'u' (here and in
Please mention in the commit message that \undo will give strange
results when used with \key and \clef.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6588067/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
On 2012/10/08 04:58:06, janek wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/6610058/diff/9001/scripts/convert-ly.py
File scripts/convert-ly.py (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6610058/diff/9001/scripts/convert-ly.py#newcode231
scripts/convert-ly.py:231: ly.progress (_ (uProcessing `%s\'... ) %
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:05 AM, d...@gnu.org wrote:
I don't think we should be documenting the Python language, others do a
better job at that. Check out
URL:http://docs.python.org/reference/lexical_analysis.html#strings
ah, ok. thanks!
___
43 matches
Mail list logo
