On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 09:11:40AM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
So what are the actual problems? Is LilyPond really too difficult?
Do we rely too much on crufty input-language solutions? How many
ritardando-like hacks do we have for common problems? Are they
listed/categorised somewhere?
2009/11/12 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
That's why I cringe a bit whenever I hear people proudly
announcing that they advertized lilypond to meeting X or
conference Y.
Do not cringe. Some people live passionately dealing with music,
education, computing and software freedom.
I feel a very big obstacle for fixing bugs: the lack of modern tools for
developing LilyPond.
For example in the CG there are many advices about Emacs, which
according to the opinion of the 94% of the expert (really expert!)
software developers I know (there are quite many of them) has been a
Op donderdag 12-11-2009 om 13:40 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Bertalan
Fodor (LilyPondTool):
Hi Bertalan,
For example in the CG there are many advices about Emacs, which
according to the opinion of the 94% of the expert (really expert!)
software developers I know
Would you please invite
Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) lilypondt...@organum.hu writes:
I feel a very big obstacle for fixing bugs: the lack of modern tools
for developing LilyPond.
For example in the CG there are many advices about Emacs, which
according to the opinion of the 94% of the expert (really expert!)
Sure, though I'm afraid they are mostly Java programmers.
One of them declined to participate even in LilyPondTool.
Bert
Would you please invite a couple of dozen of them to help with lilypond
development?
I only know about 3 really expert! programmers, possibly 6 plain
expert programmers in
Francisco Vila wrote:
2009/11/12 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
That's why I cringe a bit whenever I hear people proudly
announcing that they advertized lilypond to meeting X or
conference Y.
Do not cringe. Some people live passionately dealing with music,
education,
Perhaps even the development platform should be changed here and there
to make sure there are good tools to use.
One thing I have learnt in the past: it is mostly pointless to try
supporting a platform that is not your own choice. If others are
passionate enough about it, they will do a
Hi Graham (et al),
For the record, **I have never recommended that somebody use
lilypond**. When meeting a technically-oriented composer
Ah! That's your problem right there... I recommend Lilypond all the
time, but primarily to AESTHETICALLY-oriented composers.
In my experience, most
Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) lilypondt...@organum.hu writes:
Perhaps even the development platform should be changed here
and there to make sure there are good tools to use.
One thing I have learnt in the past: it is mostly pointless to try
supporting a platform
Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) lilypondt...@organum.hu writes:
Sure, though I'm afraid they are mostly Java programmers.
Ah, you used expert in the negative sense. Someone who is only
familiar with one thing at all rather than _particularly_ good at one
thing.
One of them declined to
Op donderdag 12-11-2009 om 08:27 uur [tijdzone -0500], schreef Kieren
MacMillan:
- approximately 300 *known* bugs that produce garbage output that
nobody's working on. (there's about 10-15 bugs that people are
working on)
I'd love to see CodaMusic's bug list. ;)
You could look at,
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 01:40:37PM +0100, Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote:
I feel a very big obstacle for fixing bugs: the lack of modern tools for
developing LilyPond.
What, precisely do you mean by this?
- C++ and scheme sucks? I doubt this will change.
- the build system sucks? we're
2009/11/12 Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca:
IM(NS)HO, the *only* reason to enthusiastically recommend
Lilypond is its output: for 95+% of the population, it's an inferior
engraving experience (i.e., high learning curve and no GUI), but the
difference in output quality is so
I'm talking about developer tools. For example, some months ago I
got the advice to use grep to browse LilyPond source code.
BTW, have you found something better?
Werner
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
I'm talking about developer tools. For example, some months ago I
got the advice to use grep to browse LilyPond source code.
BTW, have you found something better?
Werner
Eclipse is quite good at finding macro definitions etc., but it relies
on some special
Graham Percival wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 01:40:37PM +0100, Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote:
I feel a very big obstacle for fixing bugs: the lack of modern tools for
developing LilyPond.
What, precisely do you mean by this?
- C++ and scheme sucks? I doubt this will change.
I'm talking about developer tools. For example, some months ago I
got the advice to use grep to browse LilyPond source code.
BTW, have you found something better?
for those working on a mac, XCode and BBEdit have grep-like facilities as
well as project-wide search capabilities that report
for those working on a mac, XCode and BBEdit have grep-like
facilities as
well as project-wide search capabilities that report results in a list
that is itself a navigation tool for the hits.
+1
TextWrangler (BBEdit Jr., freeware) also has this wonderful feature.
Cheers,
Kieren.
Why do you think 99% of MS Word users are aware of only 1% of its
features?
Autocad might be a better point of comparison.
As to Word, I have been responsible for informal teaching of its use in
computer labs, with clients that were on deadlines, many of whom had no
patience to learn things
I'm talking about developer tools. For example, some months ago I
got the advice to use grep to browse LilyPond source code.
BTW, have you found something better?
Eclipse is quite good at finding macro definitions etc., but it
relies on some special build configuration, i must set up first
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
for those working on a mac, XCode and BBEdit have grep-like
facilities as
well as project-wide search capabilities that report results in a list
that is itself a navigation tool for the hits.
+1
TextWrangler (BBEdit Jr., freeware) also
As does M-x grep RET in Emacs. And it's variants like M-x grep-find RET
and similar. But Emacs can also navigate using tags tables, which is
more direct and makes it easier to find definitions.
XCode keeps a table of symbols for all compiled files in the project,
users can select the test of
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 04:25:40PM +0100, Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote:
Good visual debugger for both scheme and C++, running well on Windows and
Linux.
That'll take... oh, 200 hours? Sorry, but that would probably
take all the lilypond programmers over a year to write. I don't
Graham wrote:
For the record, **I have never recommended that somebody use
lilypond**. When meeting a technically-oriented composer,
especially one working on algorithmic music, I might suggest that
they should check it out. But I think the original poster was
entirely justified in
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:55:08PM -0800, Tim Reeves wrote:
Graham wrote:
For the record, **I have never recommended that somebody use
lilypond**. When meeting a technically-oriented composer,
especially one working on algorithmic music, I might suggest that
they should check it out.
Graham: I've been on the lilypond list for a long time. Tried lilypond
many times before but not until recently I began to work with it
seriously with my academic work. I earn my living as an attorney, but
I also attend classes at the local Conservatory.
It has been a while since the last
Again, the only solution is to get more people involved. Is it
easy? No, but the only way to make it easier for new developers
is for more people to join, learn stuff, then write about what
they learned.
Hi, I would like to share my experience of starting lilypond
developer. I am already a
Hi,
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
I'm talking about developer tools. For example, some months ago I
got the advice to use grep to browse LilyPond source code.
BTW, have you found something better?
Eclipse is quite good at finding macro definitions etc., but it
relies
29 matches
Mail list logo
