On 12/18/09 10:57 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/18/09 9:52 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote:
Carl, you wrote Friday, December 18, 2009 4:21 PM
On 12/18/09 2:49 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk
wrote:
devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: PATCH: Issue 638 Autobeaming
On 12/17/09 11:39 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
That bug has now been fixed, and your example now beams the whole
measure (as
expected). Patch update soon to arrive
...@byu.edu
To: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
Cc: Lily devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: PATCH: Issue 638 Autobeaming
On 12/17/09 11:39 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
That bug has now been fixed, and your example now beams the whole
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
Carl,
A question. Does your code require autobeaming
rules to be defined for beams of every possible
duration? I ask because the following example beams
inconsistently, and I'm not sure if this is due to your
code or differences in the
On 12/18/09 3:58 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
Carl,
A question. Does your code require autobeaming
rules to be defined for beams of every possible
duration? I ask because the following example beams
inconsistently, and I'm not
On 12/18/09 2:49 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote:
Carl,
A question. Does your code require autobeaming
rules to be defined for beams of every possible
duration? I ask because the following example beams
inconsistently, and I'm not sure if this is due to your
code or
Carl, you wrote Friday, December 18, 2009 4:21 PM
On 12/18/09 2:49 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk
wrote:
A question. Does your code require autobeaming
rules to be defined for beams of every possible
duration? I ask because the following example beams
inconsistently, and I'm not
On 12/18/09 9:52 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote:
Carl, you wrote Friday, December 18, 2009 4:21 PM
On 12/18/09 2:49 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk
wrote:
A question. Does your code require autobeaming
rules to be defined for beams of every possible
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/18/09 3:58 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
I think that if we establish the rule a broken beam decision is
never reconsidered we can abolish the '* rule for beaming patterns
and instead let a non-specified minimal duration always be broken
On 12/18/09 10:13 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/18/09 3:58 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
I think that if we establish the rule a broken beam decision is
never reconsidered we can abolish the '* rule for beaming patterns
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/18/09 9:52 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote:
Carl, you wrote Friday, December 18, 2009 4:21 PM
On 12/18/09 2:49 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk
wrote:
A question. Does your code require autobeaming
rules to be
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/16/09 10:23 PM, Frédéric Bron frederic.b...@m4x.org wrote:
At last, thanks to help above and beyond the call of duty by Neil, I
have finally got the autobeam engraver fixed so it beams 4 4 right
when there are 16th notes in the 2nd or 4th beat
On 12/17/09 1:25 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/16/09 10:23 PM, Frédéric Bron frederic.b...@m4x.org wrote:
At last, thanks to help above and beyond the call of duty by Neil, I
have finally got the autobeam engraver fixed so it beams
On 12/17/09 1:25 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/16/09 10:23 PM, Frédéric Bron frederic.b...@m4x.org wrote:
Deep breath.
So it would appear that no terminal/irreversible decision based on the
minimum duration has been done yet
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/17/09 1:25 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/16/09 10:23 PM, Frédéric Bron frederic.b...@m4x.org wrote:
Deep breath.
So it would appear that no terminal/irreversible decision based on
On 12/17/09 7:54 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/17/09 1:25 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/16/09 10:23 PM, Frédéric Bron frederic.b...@m4x.org wrote:
Deep breath.
So it
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
With the revised code and adding an autobeaming rule for 1/64 notes to
the default beam settings, the beaming is consistent.
Without the addition of an autobeaming rule for 1/64 notes the beaming
appears to be inconsistent. I will investigate this
On 12/17/09 9:53 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
With the revised code and adding an autobeaming rule for 1/64 notes to
the default beam settings, the beaming is consistent.
Without the addition of an autobeaming rule for 1/64 notes the
On 12/17/09 11:39 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
That bug has now been fixed, and your example now beams the whole measure (as
expected). Patch update soon to arrive.
Patch set 2 is now on Rietveld.
http://codereview.appspot.com/179083
Thanks,
Carl
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 12/17/09 9:53 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Of course, the results were quite different from what I half expected
to see.
Yes. That difference is due to a pre-existing bug in the code. The
consider_end check used the current duration,
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
At last, thanks to help above and beyond the call of duty by Neil, I have
finally got the autobeam engraver fixed so it beams 4 4 right when there are
16th notes in the 2nd or 4th beat of the measure.
Bravo, Carl! I can't
At last, thanks to help above and beyond the call of duty by Neil, I have
finally got the autobeam engraver fixed so it beams 4 4 right when there are
16th notes in the 2nd or 4th beat of the measure.
Very nice job. That's now a good reason for me to upgrade to 2.13.X.
Does this apply only to
On 12/16/09 10:23 PM, Frédéric Bron frederic.b...@m4x.org wrote:
At last, thanks to help above and beyond the call of duty by Neil, I have
finally got the autobeam engraver fixed so it beams 4 4 right when there are
16th notes in the 2nd or 4th beat of the measure.
Very nice job. That's
23 matches
Mail list logo
