On 2015/07/04 04:34:01, Keith wrote:
These are strange regression tests, in that they test that \relative
has been
disabled. Maybe we don't want regression tests for this behavior. If
you do,
Nobody knew \autochange was broken until Thomas found an unused
variable, so these test are useful if \autochange is useful.
can you combine them into one, and write it so that the output looks
correct
and/or the text describes the correct output?
I'll work on the text. After describing the correct output, it will
probably be better to leave them as separate tests.
https://codereview.appspot.com/250170043/diff/20001/input/regression/autochange-relative.ly#newcode6
input/regression/autochange-relative.ly:6: in multiple passes, not all
of which
are aware of the outer @code{\\relative}."
What multiple passes ?
In Scheme then in C++.
https://codereview.appspot.com/250170043/diff/20001/input/regression/autochange-relative.ly#newcode9
input/regression/autochange-relative.ly:9: \relative { \autochange { c
f b e } }
The output looks strange, and will look even stranger after you make
\relative
non-functional.
Can you make an example that looks correct when the behavior is
correct?
Not sure.
https://codereview.appspot.com/250170043/
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
