Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 11/03/2013 05:15 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: So, there needs to be a way of saying: these are the staff pitches and the staff positions they correspond to (define c, d, e, f, g, a, b) and these are the alterations and the accidentals they correspond to (define -s, -f, etc.), now give m

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 3 Nov 2013, at 19:08, I wrote: > For E53 microtonal accidentals, I just made [1] a file regularE53.ly relying > on Graham’s regular.ly, which must be present as input file. (There is also > example on using Unicode input in LilyPond.) > > > 1. > https://www-lagring.telia.se/Shares/Home.asp

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 3 Nov 2013, at 18:15, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > The current method where (using English names) c, cf, cs, d, df, ds, e, ef, > es, f, ff, fs, g, gf, gs, a, af, as and b, bf, bs are all defined, just > doesn't scale when you are dealing with many different kinds of microtonal > altera

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 3 Nov 2013, at 18:25, Graham Breed wrote: > On 11/03/2013 05:15 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > >> So, there needs to be a way of saying: these are the staff pitches and >> the staff positions they correspond to (define c, d, e, f, g, a, b) and >> these are the alterations and the accid

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 03/11/13 13:53, David Kastrup wrote: We've been fingerpointing back and forth for years over this. Without an actual user/musician like Hans at least teaming up with a programmer, nothing will happen. It's not meant to be fingerpointing -- I'm not blaming anyone for development not moving

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 3 Nov 2013, at 18:15, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 17:55, Hans Aberg wrote: >> As a preparation, LilyPond might get intervals: it is going to be too >> complicated to write out names for all pitch combinations. >> >> A pitch is defined by a written pitch plus a sequence of

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 03/11/13 17:55, Hans Aberg wrote: As a preparation, LilyPond might get intervals: it is going to be too complicated to write out names for all pitch combinations. A pitch is defined by a written pitch plus a sequence of intervals added to it. Accidentals are a special case: intervals not ch

Allow \partial to occur in mid-piece (issue 21370043)

https://codereview.appspot.com/21370043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely File Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/21370043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode1458 Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:1458: #end-of-line-invisible

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 3 Nov 2013, at 13:17, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 12:34, Hans Aberg wrote: >> I know how to do it from the theoretical point of view, but somebody who >> knows the internals of LilyPond must do it. > > Of course. I'm just raising it as pertinent to the discussion. :-) As

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 3 Nov 2013, at 13:53, David Kastrup wrote: > Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes: > >> On 03/11/13 12:34, Hans Aberg wrote: >>> I know how to do it from the theoretical point of view, but somebody >>> who knows the internals of LilyPond must do it. >> >> Of course. I'm just raising it as pertin

Re: Microtonality

On 27 Sep 2013, at 08:45, David Kastrup wrote: > Well, today's xkcd, at the surface more being about LilyPond's choice of > extension language, still seems somewhat on-topic here: > > (mark the mouse-over text) Perhaps some mathematical abstractions can help: The set of

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 2:20 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> On Nov 3, 2013, at 1:50 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> Shrug. At any rate, it would be important to get some feedback >>> regarding installation of the stock LilyPond binary distribution on the >>> newest OSX. It

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

Mike Solomon writes: > On Nov 3, 2013, at 1:50 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Shrug. At any rate, it would be important to get some feedback >> regarding installation of the stock LilyPond binary distribution on the >> newest OSX. It would be good if that worked before we put out 2.18. > > http

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 2:03 PM, Mike Solomon wrote: > > On Nov 3, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling > wrote: > >> On 03/11/13 13:36, Mike Solomon wrote: >>> Doesn’t work, but all the files in flower compile fine with gcc, so I’m a >>> happy camper. >>> Apple’s home cooked clang is not fr

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 13:36, Mike Solomon wrote: >> Doesn’t work, but all the files in flower compile fine with gcc, so I’m a >> happy camper. >> Apple’s home cooked clang is not free software, so there’s no reason to >> expect free software

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On 03/11/13 13:36, Mike Solomon wrote: Doesn’t work, but all the files in flower compile fine with gcc, so I’m a happy camper. Apple’s home cooked clang is not free software, so there’s no reason to expect free software to compile with it. I don’t mind giving up on it. It's difficult to see

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 1:50 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> Apple’s home cooked clang is not free software, so there’s no reason >> to expect free software to compile with it. > > Non sequitur. There is nothing wrong with trying to bring some more > taste of free software to

Re: Microtonal accidentals

Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes: > On 03/11/13 12:34, Hans Aberg wrote: >> I know how to do it from the theoretical point of view, but somebody >> who knows the internals of LilyPond must do it. > > Of course. I'm just raising it as pertinent to the discussion. :-) We've been fingerpointing back

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

Mike Solomon writes: > Apple’s home cooked clang is not free software, so there’s no reason > to expect free software to compile with it. Non sequitur. There is nothing wrong with trying to bring some more taste of free software to people in the Apple jails. Now there are alternative means, so

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 1:15 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 12:33, Mike Solomon wrote: >> >> [ ... snip ... ] >> >> …these fonts are always a pain, but I usually figure out some way to cheat >> and get them in there. But that shouldn’t have anything to do with the >> compiler.

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 03/11/13 12:34, Hans Aberg wrote: I know how to do it from the theoretical point of view, but somebody who knows the internals of LilyPond must do it. Of course. I'm just raising it as pertinent to the discussion. :-) ___ lilypond-devel mailing

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On 03/11/13 12:33, Mike Solomon wrote: [ ... snip ... ] …these fonts are always a pain, but I usually figure out some way to cheat and get them in there. But that shouldn’t have anything to do with the compiler. Well, what's odd is that your ./configure script says that it finds gcc: chec

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 3 Nov 2013, at 11:49, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 11:42, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: >> For Lilypond in particular, the problem of supporting microtonal notation is >> less about symbols per se and more about the underlying representation of >> pitch, >> and how that rela

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 3 Nov 2013, at 11:42, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 11:20, Hans Aberg wrote: >> FYI, some "Extended Helmholtz-Ellis JI” accidentals [1-2], in fact designed >> quite recently, but a nice input. There is also a Unicode font at [3]. >> Notation also mentioned at [4]. >> >> The

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:45 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 11:18, Mike Solomon wrote: >> Yeah, the output is fine (clean bill of health, all systems go). I had to >> specifically set CPPFLAGS to deal w/ some homebrew issues, but otherwise >> nothing out of the ordinary. > > Ah

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 03/11/13 11:42, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: For Lilypond in particular, the problem of supporting microtonal notation is less about symbols per se and more about the underlying representation of pitch, and how that relates both to accidentals and transposition. Specifically in relation to

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On 03/11/13 11:18, Mike Solomon wrote: Yeah, the output is fine (clean bill of health, all systems go). I had to specifically set CPPFLAGS to deal w/ some homebrew issues, but otherwise nothing out of the ordinary. Ahh, OK. That's odd; OK, I accept that the clang you have has been a little

Re: Microtonal accidentals

On 03/11/13 11:20, Hans Aberg wrote: FYI, some "Extended Helmholtz-Ellis JI” accidentals [1-2], in fact designed quite recently, but a nice input. There is also a Unicode font at [3]. Notation also mentioned at [4]. The arrow accidentals that LilyPond has, are used for syntonic comma 81/81 al

PATCHES: Countdown – November 7th – 06:00 GMT

Hello *Countdown – November 7th – 06:00 GMT* 3628 Enhancement Janek Warchol push Patch: Make sure slurs actually avoid sta

Microtonal accidentals

FYI, some "Extended Helmholtz-Ellis JI” accidentals [1-2], in fact designed quite recently, but a nice input. There is also a Unicode font at [3]. Notation also mentioned at [4]. The arrow accidentals that LilyPond has, are used for syntonic comma 81/81 alterations (staff system in Pythagorean

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:15 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 11:00, Mike Solomon wrote: >> That’s fine, I’ll download gcc. > > From what I understand from friends who've experienced the same, you'll have > to manually remove/rewrite some of the symlinks. > > Just to check -- bef

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On 03/11/13 11:00, Mike Solomon wrote: That’s fine, I’ll download gcc. From what I understand from friends who've experienced the same, you'll have to manually remove/rewrite some of the symlinks. Just to check -- before you rework everything -- did you manually re-run the configure script

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:37 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes: > >> On 03/11/13 10:09, Mike Solomon wrote: >>> Looks like some files in flower don't play nice with the most recent >>> version of the standard library bundled with Xcode… >>> >>> Any ideas for how to proceed?

A \score-lines markup list command for multi-lines embedded scores (issue 21280043)

https://codereview.appspot.com/21280043/diff/1/lily/lily-lexer.cc File lily/lily-lexer.cc (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/21280043/diff/1/lily/lily-lexer.cc#newcode79 lily/lily-lexer.cc:79: {"score-lines", SCORELINES}, If the dash in `score-lines' is problematic (and I agree it would be

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 10:37, David Kastrup wrote: >> We committed a few Clang-related fixes in the past, I think mostly due >> to Graham's insistence/testing, but I think at some point of time the >> "compile with Clang" ambition just faded. >

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On 03/11/13 10:37, David Kastrup wrote: We committed a few Clang-related fixes in the past, I think mostly due to Graham's insistence/testing, but I think at some point of time the "compile with Clang" ambition just faded. I just tried a clang-based build on my Ubuntu 13.10 system, just to see

Re: mac os x 10.9 and libguile.h

Mike Solomon writes: > mbp-de-mike:build mikesolomon$ ls /usr/local/Cellar/guile18/1.8.8/include > guile libguilelibguile.h > > I’m stumped. It is obvious that CPPFLAGS is pointing to a directory > with libguile.h, but AC_CHECK_HEADERS doesn’t find it there. Running > as root doe

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes: > On 03/11/13 10:09, Mike Solomon wrote: >> Looks like some files in flower don't play nice with the most recent >> version of the standard library bundled with Xcode… >> >> Any ideas for how to proceed? > > If I understand right (I'm not a Mac user), latest Xcode

Re: mac os x 10.9 and libguile.h

On Nov 2, 2013, at 1:46 PM, Mike Solomon wrote: > > On Nov 2, 2013, at 1:17 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Mike Solomon writes: >> >>> > > > So this definitely gives a directory with libguile.h in it. But for some > reason it’s not found by the configure script. > Some more digging. W

Re: A \score-lines markup list command for multi-lines embedded scores (issue 21280043)

Reviewers: lemzwerg, https://codereview.appspot.com/21280043/diff/1/lily/lily-lexer.cc File lily/lily-lexer.cc (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/21280043/diff/1/lily/lily-lexer.cc#newcode79 lily/lily-lexer.cc:79: {"score-lines", SCORELINES}, On 2013/11/03 08:56:47, lemzwerg wrote: If the

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On 03/11/13 10:09, Mike Solomon wrote: Looks like some files in flower don't play nice with the most recent version of the standard library bundled with Xcode… Any ideas for how to proceed? If I understand right (I'm not a Mac user), latest Xcode has clang as default compiler, and symlinks t

compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

Looks like some files in flower don't play nice with the most recent version of the standard library bundled with Xcode… clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-mno-fused-madd' clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-L/usr/local/lib' In file included from /Users/mikes

Re: mac os x 10.9 and libguile.h

On Nov 3, 2013, at 9:37 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> mbp-de-mike:build mikesolomon$ ls /usr/local/Cellar/guile18/1.8.8/include >> guilelibguilelibguile.h >> >> I’m stumped. It is obvious that CPPFLAGS is pointing to a directory >> with libguile

Re: Issue 3639: tuplet of a single chord gives a syntax error (issue 20320044)

Reviewers: Keith, Message: On 2013/11/02 22:34:51, Keith wrote: I have been reading, slowly absorbing this and the patch for issue 3618, and see no problems so far. I see now that the challenge is not so much determining that \repeat... is not a duration for \tuplet 6/4 \repeat tremolo