Re: RE:Programming error - cross fingers
Hi Graham
I do use %{ comments blocks, but typically only when testing new code. It's
much .. much faster to highlight a block and delete it. The alternative is
sectioning out a block... and then another etc... etc... etc... Granted the
time difference is minimal, but can add up in a large score especially when
narrowing an error down, and after all time is precious (to me anyway).
Also, my way tends to appeal greatly to the circumstance which is usually
great frustration. Somehow ... it just makes me happy :)
Stephen
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: RE:Programming error - cross fingers
On Thu, 2016-06-16 at 13:24 -0400, Stephen MacNeil wrote:
> The way I approach an error like this may or may not help. But I can
> tell you what I do. I start deleting large sections of the source.
> Bottom up.
Stephen doubtless already knows this but, for the benefit of all:
block
comments
%{ delineated
by
percent-openbrace
and
percent-closebrace
%}
are your friend
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE:Programming error - cross fingers
Thanks Gents for the suggestions. I suppose the binary chop technique is necessary here. This is always tedious and very time consuming, but in this case I have just found that I can place the troublesome chord earlier in the piece and it compiles fine, so I can avoid the binary chop by just moving the chord in the piece until it fails. It’s an odd sort of error, and hard to see what could possibly cause such a thing. The trouble with the program crossing it’s fingers is that it’s not that funny when your score has suddenly collapsed and you don’t know how to proceed, and that’s all the computer can say! And when you see this joke repeated at you several dozen times every compile, like all jokes, it ceases to be funny upon repitition. Although I am a great believer in maintaining one’s sense of humour, I do tend to be more sombre in my programming error messages. Ah well, maybe lilypond is telling this curmudgeon to lighten up. I know that due to the architecture of lilypond and the nature of musical score layout engines that it may not always be possible to state an exact line number or source code file position for an error, but I just wish the errors were somewhat more informative to the end user. With this one, all I know is there is an error somewhere inside a massive score, with no clue as to what the nature of the error is, in end user practical terms. Andrew ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE:Programming error - cross fingers
HI Andrew The way I approach an error like this may or may not help. But I can tell you what I do. I start deleting large sections of the source. Bottom up. Make sure you create a backup. Once the error is gone and I know the general area. I add the previous section removed and start with deleting smaller portions. After a few minutes I can get to the line that causes the problem. This all said there has been one score ... and only one where I found the error, however the syntax was correct, so I copied the score to a new file and it compiled while the other did not. I spent some time to deal with that, but since the actual code worked saved as a new file, I could only surmise that lily was tired of working on that file, and didn't realize I had tricked her. HTH Stephen Of course I was joking at the end :) oh and I rather like (crossing fingers) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
