Joe Neeman joenee...@gmail.com writes:
Ok, that's a good point. It still seems a little strange to me,
though, that
\undo\override Something #'color = #red
will actually reverse the effect of
\override Something #'color = #green
There is not really a point in using \undo on single
Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@fam.tuwien.ac.at writes:
On 2012-10-13 23:44, David Kastrup wrote:
\once creates a one-time-step temporary change, \temporary an
unterminated temporary change which can be terminated element-wise with
\revert
+1
That's a consistent naming scheme, and \temporary
Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@fam.tuwien.ac.at writes:
On 2012-10-13 23:29, David Kastrup wrote:
If you are referring to Werner's and Reinhold's comments, I think you
may not be reading them as the authors intended. In particular, I
believe that Reinhold was merely objecting to the names push
Joe Neeman wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 12:14 AM
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:29 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
\override overwrites the last definition
\revert throws it away/reestablishes the previous if not overwritten.
In other words, we have a pop-push and a pop. In the
Joe Neeman joenee...@gmail.com writes:
In other words, we have a pop-push and a pop. In the context of
Reinhold's email, you were suggesting (although perhaps not seriously)
adding a push. Now, I'm happy to have push and pop, but I think
pop-push is a bad interface for a stack.
It is not
It looks like I have managed to somehow hijack a thread which was
_definitely_ about something else. This is inappropriate and I
apologize. I hope the change of subject will help disentangling this.
The actual problem is that \override currently CLEARS (i.e. reverts)
the current value before
Am 14.10.2012 10:11, schrieb Marc Hohl:
Am 13.10.2012 23:44, schrieb David Kastrup:
Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de writes:
Conclusion: I appreciate your latest work – it is just that I am not
used to use \omit, \single, \undo and therefore bringing \temporary
into line with the (yet unfamiliar)
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
Joe Neeman wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 12:14 AM
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:29 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
\override overwrites the last definition
\revert throws it away/reestablishes the previous if not overwritten.
In other
On 12 Oct 2012, at 09:01, Graham Percival wrote:
... After I'm finished my phd, I'll do the thing
which every computer science student should do at least once in
their life: I'll make my own language. I'm not comfortable with
the level of abstractions that lilypond offers. Just like
Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com writes:
On 12 Oct 2012, at 09:01, Graham Percival wrote:
... After I'm finished my phd, I'll do the thing
which every computer science student should do at least once in
their life: I'll make my own language. I'm not comfortable with
the level of abstractions
Hello,
On 14 October 2012 07:39, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@fam.tuwien.ac.at writes:
On 2012-10-13 23:44, David Kastrup wrote:
\once creates a one-time-step temporary change, \temporary an
unterminated temporary change which can be terminated element-wise
David Kastrup wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 9:21 AM
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
Joe Neeman wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 12:14 AM
In other words, we have a pop-push and a pop. In the context of
Reinhold's email, you were suggesting (although perhaps not seriously)
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
[...]
On 14 October 2012 07:39, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
The current semantics are basically non-stack, but the stack can be
reanimated temporarily from the Scheme layer.
This reanimation makes sense from the user layer in some cases as
well,
James, you wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 12:05 AM
I have a patch coming that is trying to at least document \single
\hide and \omit.
Fine - \hide and \omit are quite straightforward.
i also have started to use \single to take the opportunity to better
organize NR 5.3.
Hhm. This section
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
David Kastrup wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 9:21 AM
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
I would be happier with this change. Why not just change the action
of \override to be push alone? As its current implementation pretty
well
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
James, you wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 12:05 AM
I have a patch coming that is trying to at least document \single
\hide and \omit.
Fine - \hide and \omit are quite straightforward.
i also have started to use \single to take the opportunity
On 14 Oct 2012, at 10:51, David Kastrup wrote:
Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com writes:
On 12 Oct 2012, at 09:01, Graham Percival wrote:
... After I'm finished my phd, I'll do the thing
which every computer science student should do at least once in
their life: I'll make my own language.
Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com writes:
On 14 Oct 2012, at 10:51, David Kastrup wrote:
Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com writes:
On 12 Oct 2012, at 09:01, Graham Percival wrote:
... After I'm finished my phd, I'll do the thing
which every computer science student should do at least once in
David Kastrup wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 10:56 AM
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
David Kastrup wrote Sunday, October 14, 2012 9:21 AM
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
I would be happier with this change. Why not just change the action
of \override to be
On 14 Oct 2012, at 13:25, David Kastrup wrote:
Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com writes:
On 14 Oct 2012, at 10:51, David Kastrup wrote:
Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com writes:
On 12 Oct 2012, at 09:01, Graham Percival wrote:
... After I'm finished my phd, I'll do the thing
which every
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
A.
\override does a pop/push
\revert does a pop
\temporary\override does a push.
so \temporary\override and \revert are a matching pair.
More importantly: on an empty stack, any number of \override followed by
\revert are a matching pair.
B
I now have GUB running again - thanks to Julien I have renamed logging.py in
GUB to gub_log.py and it now builds all the required files. This note is to
record that fact, and to add documentation to my recent push to the GUB git
repo.
--
Phil Holmes
Two years ago, David and I had a discussion about the existence of /tweak,
/set, and /override. David pointed out the confusing nature of the
different ways of changing properties, and the difficulty of explaining
this to the user.
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
Two years ago, David and I had a discussion about the existence of /tweak,
/set, and /override.
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-06/msg00054.html
Perhaps now David has put together enough
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
Two years ago, David and I had a discussion about the existence of /tweak,
/set, and /override. David pointed out the confusing nature of the
different ways of changing properties, and the difficulty of explaining
this to the user.
On 14/10/2012 17:46, Janek Warchoł wrote:
As for (2), i see that there are three operations that can be
performed on stack: push, pop and clear.
Please, can we get away from thinking in terms of implementation details
and instead think of the use cases:
1) Just set a property (grob or context
I dedicate all my code reviews to Graham Percival.
LGTM
http://codereview.appspot.com/6625078/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@kainhofer.com writes:
So even the documentation for \override says that it is NOT an
override...
Yes, Han-Wen has taken some effort to make Use the Source, Luke not
too easy. \override is not an override, but that's what it is called.
Or else what? said Alice,
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 5:19 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
You are viewing this from the stack angle. But that is a complex
view already. The actual user view is
A.
\override sets a context-specific property value
\revert removes a context-specific property value
This works
I dedicate all my code reviews to Graham Percival.
Marc,
your change is so big that i have trouble grasping it and understanding
everything, but i have a few specific comments.
Janek
Sorry, Reinhold - forgot to send to all..
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer
reinh...@kainhofer.com wrote:
On 14/10/2012 17:46, Janek Warchoł wrote:
As for (2), i see that there are three operations that can be
performed on stack: push, pop and clear.
Please, can we get away
- Original Message -
From: janek.lilyp...@gmail.com
To: m...@hohlart.de; mts...@gmail.com; thomasmorle...@googlemail.com;
ianhuli...@gmail.com; k-ohara5...@oco.net; d...@gnu.org;
m...@mikesolomon.org
Cc: re...@codereview-hr.appspotmail.com; lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, October
- Original Message -
From: Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu
To: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org; Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk
Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: Naming _another_ lacking puzzle piece
Perhaps now David has put together
Am 14.10.2012 19:17, schrieb janek.lilyp...@gmail.com:
I dedicate all my code reviews to Graham Percival.
Marc,
your change is so big that i have trouble grasping it and understanding
everything, but i have a few specific comments.
Janek
On 10/14/2012 07:36 PM, lilypond-devel-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
Please, can we get away from thinking in terms of implementation details
and instead think of the use cases:
1) Just set a property (grob or context property) to a certain value,
don't worry about previous values
2) Set a property
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 10:22:55AM +, lilyp...@googlecode.com wrote:
Comment #6 on issue 1272 by philehol...@gmail.com: remove old /web/
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1272
I have SSH access to lilypond.org, but not htaccess knowledge.
Would you like to talk me
For 20:00 MDT Tuesday October 16
Maintainability:
Issue 847
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=847: python scripts
should add an autogenerated marker - R 6688045
http://codereview.appspot.com/6688045/
Issue 1707
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Please review.
Description:
Fix extra spacing in Kievan notation
In Kievan notation, notes should be spaced as tightly as possible within
melismas.
This patch fixes extra spacing caused by long syllables.
Issue 2631.
Please review this at
I dedicate my code reviews to Graham Percival.
LGTM
http://codereview.appspot.com/6689045/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
LGTM
---
i dedicate my code reviews to Graham
http://codereview.appspot.com/6683053/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Hi,
this looks strange: when i go to side-by-side diffs, i don't see any
changes, just error: old chunk mismatch.
Janek
http://codereview.appspot.com/6681045/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
41 matches
Mail list logo
