ed to work. Human relations are
both more flexible and more elusive. There is no guarantee anything
will work or fail other than trying and doing one's best in recovering
gracefully from failure.
--
David Kastrup
ture of hel-arabic.ly.
--
David Kastrup
er off removing
that contribution than allowing it to contribute to a toxic work
environment driving more contributors away than it will draw in new
users.
Please try to do your part in keeping LilyPond pleasant to work with and
to work on.
Thank you
--
David Kastrup
this impeccable timing, I'd not have mentioned it.
Talk about waxing nostalgic!
--
David Kastrup
s the surprise come from?
>
> Well, both `#+3` and `#-3` work, so it might be tempting to assume
> that `+3` and `-3` also work (outside of `\markup`).
So does ##e+3.0 and so does #3/1 so should we be supporting those as well?
--
David Kastrup
part of numerical tokens in certain syntax modes, so it
isn't just the parser that is involved here but also the lexer.
> Can you imagine any other use for `+` right before numbers? Otherwise
> I suggest to make it work, to provide the least surprise for users.
Do we say anywhere that `+` is a sign in LilyPond syntax? Where does
the surprise come from?
--
David Kastrup
argument for wasting syntactic elements on doing nothing?
--
David Kastrup
Thomas Morley writes:
> Am Mo., 25. Dez. 2023 um 20:55 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>>
>> Probably. Articulation events with a listener are removed (and
>> separately broadcast) from the articulations on a non-chord NoteEvent
>> before it is passed to its own engrav
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Probably related to the code and comment in lily/rhythmic-music-iterator.cc.
Probably. Articulation events with a listener are removed (and
separately broadcast) from the articulations on a non-chord NoteEvent
before it is passed to its own engravers.
--
Da
that mess will be tasked with
the consequences, for better or worse.
--
David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes:
> Werner LEMBERG writes:
>
>>> Inspired by
>>> <https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/132340/lilypond-different-clefs-for-each-voice-on-one-staff>
>>>
>>> Should we be offering something like that?
>>
>> What
think that one would be more special,
though.
--
David Kastrup
oneVoice
\change Staff = "lower" % change back to standard staff
}
>>
}
}
}
--
David Kastrup
d I don't think it is our job to promote a
different style.
--
David Kastrup
ond 10 years ago.
Feels like Carl Benz complaining about stick shift: just makes you
question your customer model.
--
David Kastrup
ublic all-translation-properties
> (append all-user-translation-properties
> all-internal-translation-properties))
> ```
>
> completely construct `all-translation-properties`. Why the additional
> `set!`?
Looks like an oversight in commit 7b22eeeee2505be517e58c3f922ddc53f1b7b0bd
--
David Kastrup
timed out
Uh-oh. It's been now several years since git-cl has no place whatsoever
in our workflow. I cannot find any reference to git-cl in our current
documentation, so can you figure out where you got a reference to it?
Thanks
--
David Kastrup
ge.html,web-big-page.it.html,web-big-page.ja.html,web-big-page.zh.html}
>
>
> Is that expected?
It looks to me like the "not accessible" file names are without any file
extension. That would make it unlikely that their size can be
determined. Something appears rotten.
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le dimanche 09 juillet 2023 à 12:39 +0200, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> The build isn't broken unless you use bytecode compilation. Do we do
>> this in general?
>
>
> Depends on who is "we". I for one always build with bytecode because L
tion. Do we do
this in general? Do we have a way of installing bytecode?
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le vendredi 07 juillet 2023 à 14:43 +0200, Jean Abou Samra a écrit :
>> Le vendredi 07 juillet 2023 à 14:15 +0200, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> > Yikes. Looks like the bytecode compiler/optimizer/whatever converts (- )
>> > or
>&
omething like it into (- 0 )
Without checking, this looks like a Guile problem, but that's not going
to help us. Huh. So this needs either a workaround or a revert of the
operator patch or some partial undo. I'll try to figure out more. I
haven't yet worked with bytecode.
--
David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes:
> Dan Eble writes:
>
>> On Jun 16, 2023, at 19:13, Jason Yip wrote:
>>>
>>> minSubdivideInterval and maxSubdivideInterval. They are both
>>> Rationals. Their numerator and denominator must be a power of 2. For
>>> each powe
at sounds like it would make more sense to specify those values in the
form of a "duration log", like the first argument to a ly:make-duration
call.
--
David Kastrup
to general project reponsibility",
maintaining it under accounts with a possibly diverging interest (where
deletion is an extreme form of a diverging interest) does not appear
like the best policy to me.
--
David Kastrup
me bug reports, IIRC).
>
> Thanks, that helps. However, I still don't understand what impact on
> size this makes. Do the two result in different PDF primitives?
I seem to remember that the second variant allowed Ghostscript to merge
subsetted fonts from included separate files.
--
David Kastrup
t (grobs reaching
the originating event only via another grob need a directed tweak
explicitly stating their grob name).
--
David Kastrup
gt; `convert-ly` emit a warning.
A default conversion of \text to \roman would likely match more than 90%
of the current uses.
--
David Kastrup
odern music engravers have taken
> inspiration from the LilyPond attitude to engraving. The Dorico blog
> posts have been quite explicit about it, and maybe we could ask the
> MuseScore folks for comments too.
For better or worse, I think the main selling point of LilyPond these
days is not as much quality as workflow.
--
David Kastrup
John Wheeler writes:
> On 3/19/23 11:51, David Kastrup wrote:
>> So how to better involve others?
>
> Maybe a good place to start is by asking a few questions.
>
> What you would like these others to do?
Well, we are talking about core maintenance and rearchitecting her
John Wheeler writes:
> On 3/19/23 11:51, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> When I was becoming familiar with the LilyPond manuals, it seemed to
> me one manual that was missing was a concise specification of the
> LilyPond language, something paralleling the R5RS for the Scheme
> langua
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le lundi 20 mars 2023 à 00:15 +0100, David Kastrup a écrit :
>
>> The MYBACKUP and MYPARSE stuff messes with the input in order to trigger
>> syntactic decisions based on expression values. That's a bit more than
>> usually expected from
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le dimanche 19 mars 2023 à 17:51 +0100, David Kastrup a écrit :
>>
>> So how to better involve others? The parser may be one of those
>> areas with an awful amount of shoestring and glue, namely fiddling
>> around until things happen
David Zelinsky writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> But while my desire for work on user-pointing and internal design and
>> architecture at that time sort of unfolded mostly in a vacuum, the years
>> since then have not seen a lot of uptake.
> [...]
>>
shoestring and glue, namely fiddling around
until things happen to work. All that fiddling happens in private
before commits end up in master, meaning that it has no opportunity to
end up contagious the way it happens now.
That's not really fabulous regarding the "bus factor" in that area.
--
David Kastrup
r the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> ```
>
> Thoughts?
"Mainly authored" relies on which metric? How are mechanical
reformattings not generally affecting the copyright situation catered
for? How is a generational update expounding on the original idea but
not leaving original code in place catered for?
--
David Kastrup
ying with all
> the other relevant licences.
>
> So the effect of the GPL is that we can safely behave as if lilypond
> is completely GPL, while the legal reality is completely different.
"legal reality". Sigh. And of course you know much better about the
legal reality than the law professors consulted by the FSF.
--
David Kastrup
Wol writes:
> On 15/02/2023 17:08, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Wols Lists writes:
>>
>>> On 15/02/2023 02:01, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>>> Personally, I'd be happiest if everybody who updated a file was
>>>>> responsible for making s
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le mercredi 15 février 2023 à 18:05 +0100, David Kastrup a écrit :
>
>> No GNU program requiring a copyright assignment for working on it has
>> ceased doing so as far as I know,
>
> [Off-topic]
>
> Actually, both GCC and Guile h
Wols Lists writes:
> On 15/02/2023 02:01, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Personally, I'd be happiest if everybody who updated a file was
>>> responsible for making sure the copyright date was updated
>>> appropriately,
>
>> That is going to work fantastically wel
nt, and they DON'T own the
> copyright, then changing the copyright notice smacks of fraud.
The FSF does not change copyright notices of projects it is not in
charge of and I already explained why this statement is both wrong and
unnecessarily inflammatory.
> Simple as. BUT DOES ANYBODY REALLY CARE? Only the armchair lawyers, I
> guess :-)
I am not sure who you try to denigrate here and for what purpose.
--
David Kastrup
gt; Personally, I'd be happiest if everybody who updated a file was
> responsible for making sure the copyright date was updated
> appropriately,
That is going to work fantastically well, right? Distribute
responsibility until nobody feels responsible for anything and enjoy the
chaos.
--
David Kastrup
(cf Harald Welte regarding the Linux kernel). That is the
same with LilyPond.
Mouthing off that the practices vetted extensively by the FSF lawyers
are fraudulent is really pointless.
--
David Kastrup
local changes. If you are looking for the source of
some change, the grand replace has no impact on it.
I can understand this discussion about whitespace/formatting changes
(`git blame -w` helps and can be set as the default behavior). For the
grand replace, it seems like a nothingburger to me.
--
David Kastrup
--- End Message ---
--
David Kastrup
ntroduce any workaround for
> such outdated systems.
Did you intent to write "need not" instead of "must not"? In German,
the negations of the corresponding words have other meanings than in
English.
--
David Kastrup
s for
> someone roughly my age),
On the Internet, nobody can measure the length of your beard.
--
David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes:
> Jean Abou Samra writes:
>
>> Le 14/01/2023 à 22:10, David Kastrup a écrit :
>>> What should it be?
>>
>>
>> I have no idea. My own gut feeling is that output defs need a redesign
>> and reimplementation from scratch anyway
Dan Eble writes:
> On Jan 26, 2023, at 12:22, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>c'' x2
>>
>
> That looks a lot like "twice" to me.
Ugh. Well, it would be a rare syntax discussion that had everybody on
the same page...
--
David Kastrup
Aaron Hill writes:
> On 2023-01-26 9:57 am, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Luca Fascione writes:
>>> I'd think that if 'x' meant "last pitch" and 'X' meant "last
>>> chord", things
>>> would be real peachy.
>> Not a fan of using case
re (doesn't help that the German
accordion accompaniment notation uses c for a c major chord and C for a
single c root note).
Maybe xx for chords... Should be fast enough to type and is somewhat
mnemonic. At least more so than y .
--
David Kastrup
Aaron Hill writes:
> On 2023-01-23 3:35 pm, David Kastrup wrote:
>> p would require that there actually is a next pitch (or drum type,
>> assuming that p gets specialcased like r and R).
>
> I feel like I am missing context from the original query. '0' seems
&
Dan Eble writes:
> On Jan 23, 2023, at 18:05, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> Dan Eble writes:
>>
>>> On Jan 23, 2023, at 10:11, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I am not saying that 0 is the best choice here. It merely appears to be
>>
inal post. I had
> intended to fully call out that ** is exponentiation in some language,
> thus might not be the best symbol.
Well, mathematically c**4 in some sense is the same as c c c c . Not
saying that I find that compelling but it is some kind of argument.
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> On 24/01/2023 00:41, David Kastrup wrote:
>> At any rate, postfix expressions require lookahead, and ** requires more
>> than one token of lookahead. What constructs would you see as
>> candidates before ** ?
>
>
> Without agreeing or
Aaron Hill writes:
> On 2023-01-23 3:35 pm, David Kastrup wrote:
>> p would require that there actually is a next pitch (or drum type,
>> assuming that p gets specialcased like r and R).
>
> I feel like I am missing context from the original query. '0' seems
&
t; (number? ly:music?)
> #{
> \repeat unfold $count $mus
> #})
>
> {\time 7/8 \dup #3 a8 \dup #4 b16 c4}
> %
>
> If you don't like the name dup, you could use ru (short for repeat
> unfold)
"\\*" works as well, giving
{\time 7/8 \*3 a8 \*4 b16 c4}
--
David Kastrup
sions require lookahead, and ** requires more
than one token of lookahead. What constructs would you see as
candidates before ** ?
--
David Kastrup
a Scheme
representation, and there might be _some_ motivation to remove redundant
durations in \displayLilyMusic again when one can output
{ c'4 c' p2 } instead of the faulty { c'4 c' 2 } . But I am not sure
that removing redundancy would actually be a good thing.
--
David Kastrup
Dan Eble writes:
> On Jan 23, 2023, at 10:11, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> I am not saying that 0 is the best choice here. It merely appears to be
>> rather cheap. I thought of * and / but the first renders sequences like
>> c4*2 ambiguous and the second would at l
Benkő Pál writes:
> Jean Abou Samra ezt írta (időpont: 2023. jan.
> 22., V, 23:45):
>>
>> On 22/01/2023 23:38, David Kastrup wrote:
>> >
>> > There are situations where sticking with the default duration may make
>> > sense when something loo
usual c4 syntax for notes.
--
David Kastrup
Mats Bengtsson writes:
>On 2023-01-23 00:36, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> We have q for "repeat last chord with default duration" and 4 for
> "repeat last pitch with specific duration" but not "repeat last pitch
> with default duration".
>
>
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> On 22/01/2023 23:38, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> There are situations where sticking with the default duration may make
>> sense when something looking like (or being) an explicit duration may
>> follow.
>>
>> Like when switchi
no extra cost in terms of syntax but seems weird. A superficial
look at the ASCII table did not suggest an obvious other choice to me.
--
David Kastrup
with.
It felt sort of seeing someone enter a house through a tunnel trapdoor
that had not been used as such for a decade because there was a much
more convenient entrance by now.
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le 14/01/2023 à 22:10, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> What should it be?
>
>
> I have no idea. My own gut feeling is that output defs need a redesign
> and reimplementation from scratch anyway. In an ideal world, we wouldn't
> even have the paper/lay
setting is done only stores the
relevant paper block. Consequently, any page-level/top-level markup
currently gets only the paper block as its "layout" parameter.
That is not accepted as layout block in a score markup.
Suggestions?
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le 04/01/2023 à 22:42, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> There is a difference between a score that is downloaded and copied and
>> transferred thousands of times indefinitely, and a finalized print
>> journal that is sent from a publisher to a printer
e value to an acceptable value is
> acceptable.
There is a difference between a score that is downloaded and copied and
transferred thousands of times indefinitely, and a finalized print
journal that is sent from a publisher to a printer once.
--
David Kastrup
people.
So usually your outrage tends to be better spent in improving
code/coding rather than asking others to improve it: after all, you tend
to be most motivated about the task in the first place.
--
David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes:
> Thomas Morley writes:
>
>> Am So., 1. Jan. 2023 um 11:52 Uhr schrieb Jean Abou Samra
>> :
>>>
>>> Le 31/12/2022 à 21:15, Thomas Morley a écrit :
>>> > Today I found some time :)
>>> >
>>> > l
esting infrastructure. The testing infrastructure is
not inherently tied to the release version.
Have a fix for set-default-scale in the queue. The notenames are more
tricky: the way it looks to me, they are maintained in the parser (or
lexer?). If we don't set up a new parser, it could be that we get
bleedover of things like the default duration and the default tremolo
duration as well. That would be worth checking.
--
David Kastrup
#time #})
\displayLilyMusic { \singlebeat 5/8 { c'8 8 8 8 8 } }
For better or worse, there is no visual distinction between music
functions and reserved words.
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> [This is the continuation of
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2022-12/msg00321.html]
>
>
> Le 30/12/2022 à 15:07, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> You conflate "parsing" and "reading". For #{...#}, there is a
>
t.
pdftocairo can create an SVG from that, for example.
--
David Kastrup
code) a complete
waste of time.
This waste of time, in turn, will serve for nothing except to convince
you that other developers/users of LilyPond are unable to cater to your
use cases.
I have no idea how to get you on the same page with anybody. At the
same time, if you want something to be done, it is your job to figure
out a common base of communication.
--
David Kastrup
ng making the type-light approach of Lua nice for
extension language design. Scheme already has too many types. But that
ship has sailed...
--
David Kastrup
r \new Staff = , I never settled my mind :-) It
> expects a string, but then one could argue that accepting
> a symbol here would more sense.
could be "cisis" while Staff couldn't.
--
David Kastrup
considered
my time better invested leaving in the intermission.
Spreading the payload thin does not work for me.
Now I've spread the payload of this reply rather thin. A long caesura.
--
David Kastrup
nly didn't in my own use.
>
> The problem is the startup time of luatex. For processing our more
> than 1000 small snippets that are embedded in the final documentation
> (as PDF files), this sums up.
Why would the snippets cause multiple startups of luatex?
--
David Kastrup
; But that's true of any one feature: I build you a nice template library to
> do in
> and you find a bug while I'm . That can always happen, we know
> this, we cope with it.
> How's the TeX/texinfo build any different?
LuaTeX is not in "bugfixes only" mode. The other TeX engines are, if
even that.
--
David Kastrup
s://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2022-11/msg00237.html),
> and there are other modes without such an effect.
You did see the code I posted that would do what you asked for?
--
David Kastrup
(cons (* -0.3 baseline-skip)
(* 0.7 baseline-skip
{
\override TextScript.show-horizontal-skylines = ##t
e'4^\markup { "a" }
e'4^\markup \concat { \strut "a" }
}
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le 15/11/2022 à 14:43, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> If it's "mundane", why would the conversion result in a complex
>> replacement?
>
>
>
> Have you looked at the replacement?
>
> It is
>
> (lambda* (m #:optional headers)
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le 15/11/2022 à 14:17, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> Alternatively, providing something approaching the previous behavior
>> under a different name, assuming that this functionality has at least
>> some motivation or possibility to continue e
g but just printing “Not smart enough to convert…”).
>
>
>
> https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1732
Alternatively, providing something approaching the previous behavior
under a different name, assuming that this functionality has at least
some motivation or possibility to continue existing.
--
David Kastrup
face which only
takes two values. There are several Scheme operators that have some
automated behavior for a variable number of operands.
Other candidates that may be surprising are
< <= > >=
The C API is strictly two-operands, but from Scheme you can throw a
variable number at them.
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le 24/10/2022 à 20:00, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> Jean Abou Samra writes:
>>
>>> Personally, my dream would be to switch to a different documentation
>>> tool entirely, like Sphinx, which supports HTML, LaTeX and Texinfo
>>>
tisfactorily
smoothly operating and efficient solution.
It is not uncommon to have a proof of concept running within less than a
week, with a satisfactory efficient solution adding years of
development.
--
David Kastrup
consent. And somebody took active
> advantage of that.
Come again? Particularly in Germany, the bulk of Linux kernel
enforcement actions have been taken by Harald Welte on behalf of his
ipfilter/netfilter code in particular.
What other examples do you have in mind?
--
David Kastrup
ask contributors for such a copyright transfer.
LilyPond is not considered a strategic part of GNU, one where the FSF
would consider taking legal measures for enforcing the licensing.
--
David Kastrup
/2.2/rnrs/bytevectors.scm
> ;;; newer than compiled /app/lib/guile/2.2/ccache/rnrs/bytevectors.go
> ;;; note: source file /app/share/guile/2.2/system/base/compile.scm
> ;;; newer than compiled /app/lib/guile/2.2/ccache/system/base/compile.go
>
> [...]
Just go to bed and hope that t
David Kastrup writes:
> Jean Abou Samra writes:
>
>> Thus I wrote to the general GNU list server admins and proposed
>> to step up for being an admin on these lists, just like I am
>> already an admin on lilypond-user-fr (the French-speaking equivalent
>> of lil
.
That's the impression I also get from current LilyPond list moderators
(thanks David!): you don't really get the impression that there is
anybody doing anything except that the amount of visible spam is
essentially zero and that doesn't happen by itself.
--
David Kastrup
nching.
>
>> and now it seems you went back to feature development.
>
> Why is this a problem? Isn't the idea that a release is based on a
> 'stable' branch, and that normal development continues on 'master'?
For that idea to apply, you first need a stable branch.
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le 02/10/2022 à 15:05, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> If the function itself isn't used as a placeholder.
>
> I haven't found any such use.
>
> I've opened https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1650
git grep simple-markup
returns a
\simple "x" can be replaced with just
> "x". I suppose \simple is an artifact of history and
> can be removed. Right?
If the function itself isn't used as a placeholder.
--
David Kastrup
stake, and one of the great things about
> CI running in the background is that you don't need to make
> this decision anymore.
One example is a "trivial" merge/rebase of a commit that removes/changes
a feature and another commit that introduces a new use of the old
feature. The respective changes may well occur in a completely
different set of files.
--
David Kastrup
Jean Abou Samra writes:
> Le 23/09/2022 à 14:02, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> Jean Abou Samra writes:
>>
>>> I believe this exhibits a bug:
>>>
>>> \version "2.23.14"
>>>
>>> {
>>> \new Staff { c'1 }
>>>
1 - 100 of 6030 matches
Mail list logo
