On 2015/05/05 18:58:26, ht wrote:
Hi James,
Just to let you know, for me the changes to the content have been OK
already
since patch set 13 - many thanks for this effort! (Found still one
small typo,
though...)
Heikki
Am 06.05.2015 um 07:34 schrieb Federico Bruni:
2015-05-06 7:19 GMT+02:00 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com:
as I've already mentioned, I've already started working on a new
LilyDev. I'm going to use tools that should make it easy to build
different versions of LilyDev (e.g. 32-bit and
Federico Bruni fedel...@gmail.com writes:
2015-05-04 20:29 GMT+02:00 Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net:
Years ago I started by (accidentally) using it as a live OS. It's a
useless way of trying to use it. I wouldn't bother to try to support it.
I totally agree. In my experience a live OS
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Please review
Description:
This is in response to Issue 3981, which identified multiple methods of
creating incipits in the LSR and docs. I have deleted 2 of the LSR
snippets in the LSR and updated the 3rd to match the syntax introduced
in 2.19.16. I have imported the
2015-05-05 8:58 GMT+02:00 Valentin Villenave valen...@villenave.net:
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 12:25 PM, d...@gnu.org wrote:
This kind of addition would likely get
the most useful feedback from people *teaching* LilyPond. We don't have
a lot of those unless you count batch teachers, namely
https://codereview.appspot.com/235090043/diff/40001/scm/stencil.scm
File scm/stencil.scm (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/235090043/diff/40001/scm/stencil.scm#newcode668
scm/stencil.scm:668: An @var{axis} of Y or 1 will flip it vertically.
What about:
Value @code{X} (or @code{0}) for
Hello,
Here is the current patch countdown list. The next countdown will be on
May 9th.
You can always view the most current countdown list here:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?q=Patch%3Apush%2Ccountdown%2Creview%2Cnew%2Cwaitingcolspec=Patch%20Owner%20ID%20Summarysort=patch
On 06/05/15 10:55, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 06.05.2015 um 07:34 schrieb Federico Bruni:
2015-05-06 7:19 GMT+02:00 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com:
as I've already mentioned, I've already started working on a new
LilyDev. I'm going to use tools that should make it easy to build
I haven't checked incipit.ly, but otherwise it looks fine apart from
what appears to be an inadvertent change which needs investigating.
https://codereview.appspot.com/235980043/diff/1/Documentation/snippets/conducting-signs,-measure-grouping-signs.ly
File
2015-05-06 11:55 GMT+02:00 Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org:
As a side note: What would be the amount of work to provide a lily-dev
metapackage that could be used by people who are already using a Linux
distribution? As a Linux user I would prefer modifying my own system over
using a
LGTM.
https://codereview.appspot.com/234260043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
LGTM. I'm glad you have enough knowledge of how the compiler works to
make this patch!
https://codereview.appspot.com/234260043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 5/5/15 11:10 PM, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
On Mon, 04 May 2015 23:58:12 -0700, Valentin Villenave
valen...@villenave.net wrote:
Speaking as someone who regularly gives LilyPond initiation seminars
for adults and children, the hardest part is explaining to them why
\relative
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/109710/likely-unlikely-macros-in-the-linux-kernel-how-do-they-work-whats-their
#define likely(x) __builtin_expect((x),1)
#define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect((x),0)
Are there any objections to adding something like these to Lilypond? (I’d use
On 2015/05/06 15:57:21, wl_gnu.org wrote:
Probably the best name is \octave, which was used for something
similar
until version 0.1.19
\octave c'' {c4 e g c e g c'1}
Sounds OK for me.
Werner
So is this proposing three entry modes:
\relative (unchanged)
\absolute
Some nitpicks.
Otherwise LGTM
https://codereview.appspot.com/235090043/diff/40001/scm/stencil.scm
File scm/stencil.scm (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/235090043/diff/40001/scm/stencil.scm#newcode665
scm/stencil.scm:665: (define-public (stencil-flip axis stil)
I'd call it
Hello,
I’d also vote for the three-ways distinction relative/absolute/octave as
put by Trevor.
Am 06.05.2015 um 20:43 schrieb David Kastrup:
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
Probably the best name is \octave, which was used for something
similar
until version 0.1.19
\octave c''
Hi,
2015-05-05 22:34 GMT-07:00 Federico Bruni fedel...@gmail.com:
2015-05-06 7:19 GMT+02:00 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com:
as I've already mentioned, I've already started working on a new
LilyDev. I'm going to use tools that should make it easy to build
different versions of
On 03/05/15 16:53, Phil Holmes wrote:
I'd be willing to start a draft requirements for issue handling document
tomorrow, if no-one else is desperate.
That'd be great, though it'd be even better if there could be clear requirements
beyond merely those of issue handling -- code hosting, code
Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote Wednesday, May 06, 2015 9:37 PM
Anyway, whenever you have something to share, I'll try and follow up on
whether
it's feasible with Launchpad. (BTW I recognize there are concerns about
switching to another 3rd-party service, even if free software; so please
Dan Eble d...@faithful.be writes:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/109710/likely-unlikely-macros-in-the-linux-kernel-how-do-they-work-whats-their
#define likely(x) __builtin_expect((x),1)
#define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect((x),0)
Are there any objections to adding something like these
Hi,
me too, I would not call it absolute then, because the octaves inside
this command are note absolute anymore. Am I right that the proposal is
an easier way of writing \transpose c octave { } ?
Why not just advertise \transpose c c' in the docs? I would consider it
clear and short enough.
And
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
Probably the best name is \octave, which was used for something
similar
until version 0.1.19
\octave c'' {c4 e g c e g c'1}
Sounds OK for me.
Huh. I like the contrast \relative/\absolute better. Particularly,
I like a sensible default when one
Reviewers: lemzwerg, carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com,
Message:
On 2015/05/06 14:39:02, Carl wrote:
LGTM. I'm glad you have enough knowledge of how the compiler works to
make this
patch!
Actually, the new code stays away as far as possible from the stuff
requiring intimate knowledge of the
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'lilypond' has been submitted
by the Danish team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/lilypond/da.po
(We can arrange things so
The bug would be fixed if lilypond would make ghostscript use a
complete path to the intermediate lines.ps file for the ps to pdf
conversion.
Does anyone know how to convert from any path (relative and absolute
path)
to absolute path in scheme (guile) ?
Maybe the functions in this file
LGTM
https://codereview.appspot.com/229680043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On May 6, 2015, at 14:43 , David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Neither \octave { bes, c d e f } nor \octave c { c' bes as g } or
\octave c'' { c' bes as g } seem particularly convincing.
+1
\absolute c { c; bes as g } \absolute c'’ { c' bes as g }
After further thought, and with respect,
LGTM
https://codereview.appspot.com/234260043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Here's another round of edits, also:
WARNING: could not change issue labels;
please email lilypond-devel with the issue number: 4370
No permission to edit issue
Thanks,
-Paul
https://codereview.appspot.com/235090043/diff/40001/scm/stencil.scm
File scm/stencil.scm (right):
LGTM.
https://codereview.appspot.com/235090043/diff/60001/input/regression/stencil-flip.ly
File input/regression/stencil-flip.ly (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/235090043/diff/60001/input/regression/stencil-flip.ly#newcode1
input/regression/stencil-flip.ly:1: \version 2.19.19
I would
- Original Message -
From: tdanielsmu...@googlemail.com
To: philehol...@googlemail.com
Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org; re...@codereview-hr.appspotmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: Update incipit snippets (issue 235980043 by
philehol...@googlemail.com)
I
On 2015/05/06 09:58:25, pacovila wrote:
I love \relative mode because it fits perfectly with a certain kind of
content. But if relative mode didn't exist, people would be much more
efficient using clever combinations of \transpose and sequential
expressions.
Even though \relative does exist,
Probably the best name is \octave, which was used for something
similar
until version 0.1.19
\octave c'' {c4 e g c e g c'1}
Sounds OK for me.
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
34 matches
Mail list logo
