On 2012/10/07 03:14:31, david.nalesnik wrote:
This looks great to me. I like the reordering, and
I think the explanations are very clear.
I've tweaked the curves a little in the examples (do
what you like with my suggestions!),
Thanks. I've adopted them, but with just a little further
twe
On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 02:43:48PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Marc Hohl writes:
>
> > Am 05.10.2012 18:34, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
> >
> >> i find it hard to keep up with our GLISS discussions. I've also
> >> heard that the amount of technical details, digressions and
> >> "multithreadedness"
On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 12:03:40PM +0200, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:34 AM, James wrote:
> > How is a web interface easier than email to enter information?
>
> I should've been more specific. I meant a web interface that would
> not only allow entering information, but also
Trevor--
This looks great to me. I like the reordering, and I think the
explanations are very clear.
I've tweaked the curves a little in the examples (do what you like with
my suggestions!), but otherwise:
LGTM.
https://codereview.appspot.com/6561064/diff/6001/Documentation/notation/changing
21:58:02 (UTC) Begin LilyPond compile, previous commit at
c3656fce28382903c7d2c18500f74e624e4a
21:58:12 From git.savannah.gnu.org:/srv/git/lilypond
* [new tag] release/2.17.4-1 -> release/2.17.4-1
21:58:12 Another instance (PID 29551) is already running.
22:29:01 Merged staging,
Ian Hulin hulin.org.uk> writes:
There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
current \times command.
1. \tuplet n/m {}
This should be relatively easy to implement by adding declarations to
music-functions-init.ly.
It is quite easy, so we can try it out with the atta
Reviewers: Keith, david.nalesnik,
Message:
I've added an example showing two curves that start
at the same musical moment being shaped, as well as
the changes suggested by Keith and David.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6561064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely
File Documenta
Benkő Pál writes:
The normal setting is to have four notes in a full 3/4 bar.
>>>
>>> That would be \times 3/4 rather than \times 6/4, right?
>>
>> Exactly.
>
> four quarters, yes; four eigths are 6/4, and that's what I've seen.
>
> regarding the \tuplet shorthand: I would hate "\tuplet n"
>>> The normal setting is to have four notes in a full 3/4 bar.
>>
>> That would be \times 3/4 rather than \times 6/4, right?
>
> Exactly.
four quarters, yes; four eigths are 6/4, and that's what I've seen.
regarding the \tuplet shorthand: I would hate "\tuplet n"
meaning not "\tuplet n/1" but "
>> The normal setting is to have four notes in a full 3/4 bar.
>
> That would be \times 3/4 rather than \times 6/4, right?
Exactly.
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-dev
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> I haven't seen quadruplets in the wild, so that seems like a
>> stretch.
>
> They are quite common in late-romantic piano music.
>
>> When they occur, it seems audacious to assume they are 6/4. More
>> likely than not, I would expect them to be 3/4, like if you have 4
>
> I haven't seen quadruplets in the wild, so that seems like a
> stretch.
They are quite common in late-romantic piano music.
> When they occur, it seems audacious to assume they are 6/4. More
> likely than not, I would expect them to be 3/4, like if you have 4
> notes on a halfmeasure in a 6/8
LGTM now.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6610058/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
> So, your opinion is that lilypond-book SHOULD process the
> \lilypond{...} code inside the \iffalse section and spectacularly
> fail.
It is debatable how much plain TeX code should be used at all in a
LaTeX document. Just think of a latex->html translation.
> With my colleagues, I have never
Ian Hulin writes:
> Thanks to everyone for their feedback so far.
> Here is Version 2 of the proposal.
>
> There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
> current \times command.
>
> 1. \tuplet n/m {}
> % does what \times does, but not so easily confused with \time
> % co
Thanks to everyone for their feedback so far.
Here is Version 2 of the proposal.
There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
current \times command.
1. \tuplet n/m {}
% does what \times does, but not so easily confused with \time
% command.
2. \triplet {} % shorthand fo
Ian Hulin writes:
> On 05/10/12 08:47, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Ian Hulin writes:
>>
>>> 1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction,
>>> i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you
>>> were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c , or
>>> invert it a
On 05/10/12 08:47, David Kastrup wrote:
> Ian Hulin writes:
>
>> 1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction,
>> i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you
>> were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c , or
>> invert it as \tuplet 3/2 {c8 c c} becau
On 10/06/2012 05:46 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
As you say, compile-edit-compile cycles are shorter than the full build, but can
occasionally not reveal errors, so for a proper test it's always better to nuke
the build directory and rebuild from scratch.
Out of curiosity, what kind of errors? I ima
James writes:
> Says someone who evidently has never built, submitted or tested 'doc'
> patches for LP.
Joseph Wakeling (12):
Extended documentation on Turkish classical music and Makam.
Turkish classical music corrections.
Turkish classical music documentation tweaks.
Co
- Original Message -
From: "Joseph Rushton Wakeling"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: "James" ;
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: [talk] why it'd be great to have web interface for
submittingsimple doc patches
On 10/06/2012 05:21 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
Unfortunately, test
On 05/10/12 08:10, James wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 5 October 2012 00:19, Ian Hulin wrote:
>> This is a proposal to move the triplet/tuplet discussion forward.
>>
>> There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
>> current \times command.
>>
>> 1. \tuplet n/m {}
>> % does what
On 10/06/2012 05:21 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
Unfortunately, testing that docs compile cleanly takes about 15 times as long as
code, so it's not for the underpowered or faint hearted. Used to be 2 3/4 hours
on my virtual machine.
Yes, true. The from-scratch build time for docs is pretty hefty, t
- Original Message -
From: "Joseph Rushton Wakeling"
To: "James"
Cc:
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: [talk] why it'd be great to have web interface for
submittingsimple doc patches
On 10/06/2012 04:46 PM, James wrote:
Says someone who evidently has never bui
On 10/06/2012 04:46 PM, James wrote:
Says someone who evidently has never built, submitted or tested 'doc'
patches for LP.
Er ... yes, I have. Actually my objections to having to use git-cl were based
on my experience of trying to submit a simple, small doc patch that I'd built
and tested.
Hello,
On 6 October 2012 15:23, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
> On 10/06/2012 11:34 AM, James wrote:
>>
>> How is a web interface easier than email to enter information?
>
>
> Well, the problem with simple doc patches is that to submit them to Lilypond
> you have to go through the same procedure
Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes:
> On 10/05/2012 09:31 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
>> It is easier to keep the order straight if you write a 5:4 tuplet
>> as \tuplet 5/4 {}
>
> Is there any reason why you couldn't write \tuplet 5:4 {} ... ?
Yes. 5/4 is an item that the parser is readily able to recog
On 10/05/2012 09:31 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
It is easier to keep the order straight if you write a 5:4 tuplet
as \tuplet 5/4 {}
Is there any reason why you couldn't write \tuplet 5:4 {} ... ? Keeps exact
match between musical and Lilypond syntax and avoids the potential mental block
of having
On 10/06/2012 11:34 AM, James wrote:
How is a web interface easier than email to enter information?
Well, the problem with simple doc patches is that to submit them to Lilypond you
have to go through the same procedure as if you were submitting a code patch,
which means uploading to Riedveld
Reinhold Kainhofer writes:
> On 2012-10-06 06:33, lemzw...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/6584073/diff/1/python/book_latex.py#newcode88
>> python/book_latex.py:88: \\iffalse.*\\fi))''',
>> As David has commented on the list, I would prefer if you replaced the
>> \iffalse
Marc Hohl writes:
> Am 05.10.2012 18:34, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
>
>> i find it hard to keep up with our GLISS discussions. I've also
>> heard that the amount of technical details, digressions and
>> "multithreadedness" stops some people from participating, as they
>> don't have enough time to re
On 2012-10-06 06:33, lemzw...@googlemail.com wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/6584073/diff/1/python/book_latex.py
File python/book_latex.py (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6584073/diff/1/python/book_latex.py#newcode88
python/book_latex.py:88: \\iffalse.*\\fi))''',
On 2012/10/06 02:12
Marc Hohl writes:
> Am 30.09.2012 22:03, schrieb d...@gnu.org:
>> On 2012/09/30 19:44:49, marc wrote:
>>> Am 30.09.2012 11:02, schrieb d...@gnu.org:
>>> > [...]
>>> > First, the define-public is asking for trouble. You are exposing an
>>> > internal Scheme data structure to users and make it over
Am 05.10.2012 18:34, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
Hi all,
i find it hard to keep up with our GLISS discussions. I've also heard
that the amount of technical details, digressions and
"multithreadedness" stops some people from participating, as they
don't have enough time to read long conversations car
Am 30.09.2012 22:03, schrieb d...@gnu.org:
On 2012/09/30 19:44:49, marc wrote:
Am 30.09.2012 11:02, schrieb d...@gnu.org:
> [...]
> First, the define-public is asking for trouble. You are exposing an
> internal Scheme data structure to users and make it overwritable by
the
> user. If the user
Am 06.10.2012 11:23, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Thomas Morley
wrote:
2012/10/5 :
It just occured to me: is there any way to specify different span bar
lines (at the end of the line and at the beginning of the line)?
Marc and me, we discussed this some time ago and
I'm currently building 2.17.4 and plan to upload it tonight and have it
available tomorrow. Please use 2.17.5 for claiming fixes on the issues list
from now.
--
Phil Holmes
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.o
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:34 AM, James wrote:
> How is a web interface easier than email to enter information?
I should've been more specific. I meant a web interface that would
not only allow entering information, but also handle the patch - a
formal patch, not just a suggestion.
Take gith
- Original Message -
From: "John Mandereau"
To:
Cc:
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 3:13 AM
Subject: Re: Patchy email from PhilH
This email looks like you're using an old revision of Patchy; in case it
doesn't include convenience/safety checks before pushing to master
(introduced i
Janek Warchoł writes:
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>> I think it would be good to polish this, so that this either works or
>>> always produces syntax error.
>>
>> Figuring out heuristics when or when one should not issue a warning is
>> not
Hello,
On 6 October 2012 09:51, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> Just a musing
> I think the case shown below would perfectly qualify for "could you
> write a documentation patch for this? it can be done with a web
> interface, instructions are here" - if we had the web interface.
>
> On Sat, Oct 6, 20
On 2012/10/06 07:44:51, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I think I would prefer to name this function \undo.
This more accurately expresses what it does:
\undo\voiceOne reverses everything that \voiceOne
does, or did. The action of \un\voiceOne is not
so intuitively obvious, nor does it make an English
wor
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> I think it would be good to polish this, so that this either works or
>> always produces syntax error.
>
> Figuring out heuristics when or when one should not issue a warning is
> not all that easy to decide with a r
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Thomas Morley
wrote:
> 2012/10/5 :
>> It just occured to me: is there any way to specify different span bar
>> lines (at the end of the line and at the beginning of the line)?
>
> Marc and me, we discussed this some time ago and decided not to
> provide that functi
Janek Warchoł writes:
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>> Are there any limitations? For example,
>>> would \un\clef and \un\key result in
>>> - reverting to previous clef/key
>>> - something strange
>>> - syntax error
>>
>> Something strange is most likely. \set doe
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> Are there any limitations? For example,
>> would \un\clef and \un\key result in
>> - reverting to previous clef/key
>> - something strange
>> - syntax error
>
> Something strange is most likely. \set does not really maintain a
> stack, s
Just a musing
I think the case shown below would perfectly qualify for "could you
write a documentation patch for this? it can be done with a web
interface, instructions are here" - if we had the web interface.
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 2:3
Janek Warchoł writes:
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:10 AM, wrote:
>> Is it enough to say that after
>>
>> unHideNotes = \un\hideNotes
>> oneVoice = \un\voiceOne
>>
>> you would not notice a difference? \un\omit StringNumber will revert the
>> effect of \omit StringNumber.
>
> That's what i expecte
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:10 AM, wrote:
> Is it enough to say that after
>
> unHideNotes = \un\hideNotes
> oneVoice = \un\voiceOne
>
> you would not notice a difference? \un\omit StringNumber will revert the
> effect of \omit StringNumber.
That's what i expected. Are there any limitations? For
On 2012/10/06 07:44:51, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I think I would prefer to name this function \undo.
This more accurately expresses what it does:
\undo\voiceOne reverses everything that \voiceOne
does, or did. The action of \un\voiceOne is not
so intuitively obvious, nor does it make an English
wor
Le 6 oct. 2012 à 09:10, d...@gnu.org a écrit :
> Reviewers: janek,
>
> Message:
> On 2012/10/05 14:46:09, janek wrote:
>> please provide usage example(s). I suppose i like this idea, but
> without
>> examples i don't know what exactly will be possible, and what won't be
> possible.
>
> Is it en
I think I would prefer to name this function \undo.
This more accurately expresses what it does:
\undo\voiceOne reverses everything that \voiceOne
does, or did. The action of \un\voiceOne is not
so intuitively obvious, nor does it make an English
work or phrase.
\reverse would be an alternative,
Reviewers: janek,
Message:
On 2012/10/05 14:46:09, janek wrote:
please provide usage example(s). I suppose i like this idea, but
without
examples i don't know what exactly will be possible, and what won't be
possible.
Is it enough to say that after
unHideNotes = \un\hideNotes
oneVoice = \u
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 1:06 AM, wrote:
> Are you going to report the number of errors using the `errors'
> variable? In case this is true, I would consider this a bad idea, since
> you abuse the functionality of the exit status.
>
> How large can `errors' become? The value returned by `exit' mu
54 matches
Mail list logo
