Felipe,
I'm still far from digesting the whole, but this is really great work!
2. int vs Rational
Why not use a sequence of Rationals (rather than ints) to represent
the alteration?
If we use rational numbers, we can maintain backward compatibility.
The re-scaling of the alterations is
: Re: Issue 1278: Arrow notation for quarter-tones. (issue3789044)
Felipe,
I'm still far from digesting the whole, but this is really great work!
2. int vs Rational
Why not use a sequence of Rationals (rather than ints) to represent
the alteration?
If we use rational numbers, we can
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:46 PM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
Why not use a sequence of Rationals [..] to represent the alteration?
A single Rational can hold the series as a sum, and preserve the
separability of the terms, if we use mutually prime denominators.
In scales where cih is
Hey,
lilypond-devel complained about the recipient list of this message,
so I am resending it. Sorry for those who are receiving it for the
second time.
-- Forwarded message --
Hello everyone,
First of all, thanks for the extensive comments made on this. I will try to
address
Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net writes:
In the end, I'm a physicist, and pitch is a scalar, so a
one-dimensional real-valued representation seems wisest to me.
Since real-valued means a fuzzy and undefined set of rational numbers
with denominators of the form 2^k for which not even associative
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 3:43 AM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
I advise against changing the internal representation of pitches.
I am rather skeptic against patches that would want to do this, but
from a casual glance, it looks thorough at least, and I understand
that the current system is too
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:17 PM, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Felipe,
I'm very sorry about the delay, but at least I'm looking at it now, and
I'll take care of badgering people to review it once it's ready.
Nitpick: if this were called something like change internal pitch
On 2/18/11, Han-Wen Nienhuys hanw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:17 PM, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm very sorry about the delay, but at least I'm looking at it now, and
I'll take care of badgering people to review it once it's ready.
Nitpick: if this were called
LGTM.
I admittedly don't know this part of the source well, so I'll leave
comments about that to other programmers.
My only concern is about the scope of this patch. It seems like this
patch is doing two things: implementing a new type of quarter tone
notation implementing alterations as a
Hi,
In fact, this patch is divided in a few commits in my local branch.
The ones which change the pitch representation are most of the
diff. The rest are trivial additions that enable the new notation
to be used.
If this patch is approved, there will be no problem in separating
the work in two
This work looks good to me, but I'm not an expert in this area.
I have one question, I think. Right now, the alteration consists of two
integers, which have implied denominators of 1/2 and 1/4, if I
understand correctly.
Would it be more general to have the alteration consist of two
rationals?
On 2/17/11, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
I have one question, I think. Right now, the alteration consists of two
integers, which have implied denominators of 1/2 and 1/4, if I
understand correctly.
Would it be more general to have the alteration consist of two
Hi Carl,
The denominators are not implicit.
They are set in the file scm/lily.scm via the call to ly:set-default-scale.
Also see lily/scale.cc, lily/include/scale.hh and lily/pitch.cc:89
for how this is implemented.
ly/makam.ly gives an example of how to modify the denominators.
If you need
http://codereview.appspot.com/3789044/diff/29001/python/musicexp.py
File python/musicexp.py (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/3789044/diff/29001/python/musicexp.py#newcode308
python/musicexp.py:308: return '(ly:make-pitch %d %d \'(%d . 0))' %
(self.octave,
On 2011/02/17 20:01:25, Carl
On 2/17/11 1:34 PM, Felipe Gonçalves Assis felipeg.as...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Carl,
The denominators are not implicit.
They are set in the file scm/lily.scm via the call to ly:set-default-scale.
Also see lily/scale.cc, lily/include/scale.hh and lily/pitch.cc:89
for how this is
I advise against changing the internal representation of pitches.
I say that even though this looks like very good and careful code, and
after spending two hours studying it. The extra complication, for which
the care was given, makes the system more difficult to learn,
understand, use, and
On 2011/02/18 05:43:36, Keith wrote:
The extra complication, for which the care was
given, makes the system more difficult to learn, understand, use, and
repair.
Unfortunately, I believe that the extra complication is necessary. The
commit message didn't clarify the background or our previous
I think it's ready for review now.
http://codereview.appspot.com/3789044/diff/29001/ly/makam.ly
File ly/makam.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/3789044/diff/29001/ly/makam.ly#newcode9
ly/makam.ly:9: #(ly:set-default-scale (ly:make-scale '#((0 . 0) (0 . 0)
(0 . 0) (-9 . 0) (-9 . 0) (-9
Hi,
A new patch set was uploaded, now including the scm files.
On 10 February 2011 20:32, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks! Regtests look fine, and there's nothing obviously wrong with
the code.
However, none of the scm files managed to get uploaded. I remember
hearing about
Sorry, I still can't apply this cleanly to git master. Are you sure you
did a rebase? (I admit that I'm not totally certain about how to do
this, but I've seen people in lilypond-devel talking about it -- maybe
look through the mailing list archives for tips?)
At the moment, I see failures in
Uploaded. Please check if it is all right now.
2011/2/10 Felipe Gonçalves Assis felipeg.as...@gmail.com:
Hi,
In fact, yesterday's make key cancellations independent of extraNatural
introduced a simple conflict with my patch, which I have just resolved.
Other files were automatically merged.
Hello,
A new patch set has just been uploaded. Sorry for my delay.
Felipe
2011/1/29 Felipe Gonçalves Assis felipeg.as...@gmail.com:
Right,
I will have a look at that.
Thanks!
Felipe
On 28 January 2011 12:17, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Felipe,
I'm very sorry about the
Right,
I will have a look at that.
Thanks!
Felipe
On 28 January 2011 12:17, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Felipe,
I'm very sorry about the delay, but at least I'm looking at it now, and
I'll take care of badgering people to review it once it's ready.
Unfortunately due to the
Hi Felipe,
I'm very sorry about the delay, but at least I'm looking at it now, and
I'll take care of badgering people to review it once it's ready.
Unfortunately due to the delay, we have a few extra regtests, which fail
when this patch is applied. One is tablature-string-tunings.ly -- I
think
Reviewers: ,
Message:
This patch is first and foremost a change in the internal Pitch
representation. I then suggest that we first discuss that, having it as
a reference.
Description:
Issue 1278: Arrow notation for quarter-tones.
We change the internal pitch representation so as to account for
25 matches
Mail list logo
