> Please read
> http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/contributor-big-page.html#summary-for-experienced-developers
> and start using git-cl. Plain patches posted to -devel tend to get forgotten
> in mist of syntax changes and font standards debates.
I know but there is no issue in the tr
On 20/08/2013 3:00 PM, Frédéric Bron wrote:
Dear all,
The header tie-column-format.hh is unused. tie-column-format.cc was
removed in 2.10 and removing the header does not prevent lilypond to
build. Only 2 files were including it without actually using it.
Here is the proposed patch.
Frédéric
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Hi,
please review, though, I don't expect any visible changes in reg-tests
or docs.
Description:
Some clean up about grace-settings in music-functions.scm
- Stores a list,general-grace-settings, used by make-voice-props-set and
make-voice-props-override.
- Settings to be
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/lily/misc.cc
File lily/misc.cc (left):
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/lily/misc.cc#oldcode116
lily/misc.cc:116: }
it is just a modified inverse function so that f(0)=1 instead of +inf
and f(threshold)=0 instead of f(+inf)=0.
epsilon
Dear all,
The header tie-column-format.hh is unused. tie-column-format.cc was
removed in 2.10 and removing the header does not prevent lilypond to
build. Only 2 files were including it without actually using it.
Here is the proposed patch.
Frédéric
0001-removed-unused-header-tie-column-format.h
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/lily/include/tie-column-format.hh
File lily/include/tie-column-format.hh (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/lily/include/tie-column-format.hh#newcode27
lily/include/tie-column-format.hh:27:
agreed: I checked that none of the fun
On 20/08/2013 9:00 AM, Phil Holmes wrote:
However, I (and, from what I've seen, David K, and
almost certainly Graham and probably Julien) would strongly oppose adding
extra complexity to the already over-complex build system.
I actually don't mind this, provided I can turn it off. I think it's
- Original Message -
From:
To: ; ;
Cc: ;
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: Changes how mensural flags are drawn (issue 13122044)
Well, in other MF source files the `fill' operator's arguments are
aligned vertically also:
fill z1
.. z2
.. z3
The a
Well, in other MF source files the `fill' operator's arguments are
aligned vertically also:
fill z1
.. z2
.. z3
The alignment consists of zero or more tabs plus the necessary spaces.
https://codereview.appspot.com/13122044/
___
lilypo
- Original Message -
From:
To: ;
Cc: ;
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: Changes how mensural flags are drawn (issue 13122044)
LGTM, except indentation: In MF files, we use real tabs.
https://codereview.appspot.com/13122044/
Aaargh. Thought I'd got that right,
LGTM, except indentation: In MF files, we use real tabs.
https://codereview.appspot.com/13122044/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
code LGTM, and i like the new shapes.
https://codereview.appspot.com/13122044/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
This looks fine for committing to me. There are several obvious
followup issues/commits making a lot of sense afterwards, however.
One is the obvious complement with \displayLilyScheme which makes sense
to do before the others, namely providing a notice in
Documentation/changes.itely and making
Reviewers: lemzwerg,
Message:
Please review.
Description:
Issue 3105 complains that mensural flags do not attach to stems very
well. This patch makes them attach in the same way as modern flags, and
changes how they're drawn - I think the way this is now done is more
metafont-y. It also gets t
- Original Message -
From: "Janek Warchol"
To: "David Kastrup"
Cc: "Thomas Morley" ; "LilyPond Developmet Team"
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: colorful make output! yum!
Hi,
2013/8/15 David Kastrup :
Franciszek Boehlke writes:
I think I can promise to supp
ok, i see now. So, ssize_t should remain, but renaming size_t
to ssize doesn't make any sense.
That's right. Frédéric
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listin
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/flower/include/std-string.hh
File flower/include/std-string.hh (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/flower/include/std-string.hh#newcode40
flower/include/std-string.hh:40: typedef size_t ssize; ///< I believe it
is in some c... he
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/flower/include/std-string.hh
File flower/include/std-string.hh (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/flower/include/std-string.hh#newcode40
flower/include/std-string.hh:40: typedef size_t ssize; ///< I believe it
is in some c... he
Draft 3 - now with translations including updated images (although the
words aren't correct now).
https://codereview.appspot.com/12980044/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
2013/8/20 Frédéric Bron :
[.]
Thanks for your comments, Frederic! I've added them to the Rietveld
issue for your convenience (and answered two of them). Let's continue
the discussionn there: https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/
___
lilypond-de
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Adding Frederic's comment and answering two of them.
Janek
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/flower/include/std-string.hh
File flower/include/std-string.hh (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/13051044/diff/1/flower/include/std-string.hh#newcode40
flower/
Hi,
2013/8/20 Frédéric Bron :
>> For the programmers, i'd like to ask you to look at the branch
>> dev/tie-crusade/comments
>> and read the comments we've added to the code together with Franek.
>
> Just in case some would need, we can read all the added comments with:
> git diff 5c99661096f110920
On 2013/08/17 12:29:08, Julien Rioux wrote:
It looks like we can download individual patches for each file,
so maybe we can use this with Patchy somehow,
I've updated Patchy to handle the "too large to download" patchset. You
can review here: https://github.com/gperciva/lilypond-extra/pull/14 o
Hi there,
well, I didn't read all messages of this thread, but I see two points of
discussion:
1. we already have LSR
2. who likes to use git?
1.: Well, we have LSR, but the current implementation needs a
tomcat-server with mysql. I did use tomcat sometimes and created some
webapps, but as a
I found one more thing, so i've uploaded a new patch anyway.
thanks!
Jaennk
https://codereview.appspot.com/13007044/diff/13001/Documentation/changes.tely
File Documentation/changes.tely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/13007044/diff/13001/Documentation/changes.tely#newcode68
Documentati
25 matches
Mail list logo
