Re: Add function for overriding broken spanners to LilyPond. (issue 6397054)

David Nalesnik writes: > David, > > Why does this have to be a list?  Why not just make it two > separate > arguments? > > If, for whatever reason, you really really really have this > information > in a two-element list called whatever, you can still write > >

PATCH: Countdown to 20120722

For 230:00 MDT Sunday July 22 Critical: 2665 : Span Bars missing with alignAboveContext - R6406051 Enhancement: Issue 2671 : Patch:

Re: [PATCH] Notes (and possible fixes) for several small problems with MIDI output (issue #1661 among others)

> Changes in MIDI instruments sometimes take effect only after a note, > not at the note to which the change is already expected to apply. > From the user's point of view, this problem occurs in an > unpredictable way since even seemingly irrelevant changes to the > input file can make the problem

Re: Add function for overriding broken spanners to LilyPond. (issue 6397054)

David, Why does this have to be a list? Why not just make it two separate > arguments? > > If, for whatever reason, you really really really have this information > in a two-element list called whatever, you can still write > > \once \alterBroken "Staff.BarLine" #'color #@whatever > > It certainl

Re: Syntax change proposal:

> I should have spotted this, but I've never used octave checks. > I suppose others might ... :( I have to use it for argus in music functions which duplicate that parameter. e.g. I have a function perfect which transforms a4. to a4. ~ a8., and in relative mode it transforms a'4. to a'4. ~ a'8.,

Re: [Feature request] attach lilypond code in pdf.

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:46:21PM +0200, Samuel Da Mota wrote: > Hi, > > I sent the following mail two days ago and it still didn't show up on > lilypond's public archive. Plus the lack of any comments from none of > you make me feel that the email senging failed. So below is the > forward emai

Re: Syntax change proposal:

David Kastrup wrote Thursday, July 19, 2012 6:53 PM > "Trevor Daniels" writes: > >> David Kastrup wrote Thursday, July 19, 2012 5:18 PM >> >>> \relative c' { b = 4. } >>> >>> (quick: can you guess what this does?). >> >> :) Well, I guessed correctly the 4. would be interpreted as a duration >>

Re: Syntax change proposal:

"Trevor Daniels" writes: > David Kastrup wrote Thursday, July 19, 2012 5:18 PM > >> The original proposal was to rule out 0. and .5 as real numbers. This >> will introduce foreseen problems: things will break where those had been >> used (there are definitely uses of 0. in our own code base but

Re: reopened Issue 2584: please make partcombine merge slurs (issue 6432047)

On 2012/07/19 17:52:13, Keith wrote: On 2012/07/19 17:25:45, dak wrote: > On 2012/07/19 17:12:21, Keith wrote: > > Again, I suggest first committing the code in a state that > > merely fixes the reported bugs about warnings, > One could remove line 264 in slur.cc Simpler to finish the loop

Re: reopened Issue 2584: please make partcombine merge slurs (issue 6432047)

On 2012/07/19 17:25:45, dak wrote: On 2012/07/19 17:12:21, Keith wrote: > Again, I suggest first committing the code in a state that > merely fixes the reported bugs about warnings, One could remove line 264 in slur.cc Simpler to finish the loop over j at line 227, similarly to the ver2.14

Re: Syntax change proposal:

David Kastrup wrote Thursday, July 19, 2012 5:18 PM > The original proposal was to rule out 0. and .5 as real numbers. This > will introduce foreseen problems: things will break where those had been > used (there are definitely uses of 0. in our own code base but not for > .5). A few of those p

Re: reopened Issue 2584: please make partcombine merge slurs (issue 6432047)

On 2012/07/19 17:12:21, Keith wrote: LGTM Again, I suggest first committing the code in a state that merely fixes the reported bugs about warnings, and then a commit to add the new capability to set two slurs if they have opposite directions. Again, I state that the "new capability" is a si

Re: fix repeat-sign problems introduced with issue 2533 (issue 6431044)

LGTM. I uploaded the two versions of the line-count fixes at http://codereview.appspot.com/6351107/diff2/1:2001/lily/bar-line.cc so we can see the difference between sets. http://codereview.appspot.com/6431044/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond

Re: reopened Issue 2584: please make partcombine merge slurs (issue 6432047)

LGTM Again, I suggest first committing the code in a state that merely fixes the reported bugs about warnings, and then a commit to add the new capability to set two slurs if they have opposite directions. http://codereview.appspot.com/6432047/ ___ lil

Re: Syntax change proposal:

"Trevor Daniels" writes: > David Kastrup wrote Thursday, July 19, 2012 2:43 PM > > >> "Trevor Daniels" writes: >> >>> David Kastrup wrote Monday, July 16, 2012 9:18 AM >>> >>> Graham Percival writes: > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:02:31AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>

Re: Syntax change proposal:

David Kastrup wrote Thursday, July 19, 2012 2:43 PM > "Trevor Daniels" writes: > >> David Kastrup wrote Monday, July 16, 2012 9:18 AM >> >> >>> Graham Percival writes: >>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:02:31AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > > One really ugly problem is interpreting

Re: Google tracker quota for attachments

- Original Message - From: "Graham Percival" To: PS upon checking, apparently we have 4 gigs allocated for "source and download", (of which we're using 0 bytes), and have used 101 MB out of 150 MB for issue attachments. Why can't those attachments come out of the same quota as the pr

Re: Syntax change proposal:

"Trevor Daniels" writes: > David Kastrup wrote Monday, July 16, 2012 9:18 AM > > >> Graham Percival writes: >> >>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:02:31AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: One really ugly problem is interpreting things like "4.". Looks like a duration, but then we have >>

Re: Adds support for cross-staff-stems (issue 6344092)

LGTM Trevor http://codereview.appspot.com/6344092/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Syntax change proposal:

David Kastrup wrote Monday, July 16, 2012 9:18 AM > Graham Percival writes: > >> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:02:31AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >>> >>> One really ugly problem is interpreting things like "4.". Looks like a >>> duration, but then we have >>> input/regression/dynamics-broken-h

Re: GOP2-2b - Stable 2.16.x releases (dictator)

Graham Percival wrote Tuesday, July 17, 2012 6:32 AM > http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_3.html > > *** Summary > > Let’s appoint David Kastrup as the “benevolent dictator” of the > stable/2.16 git branch. [etc] I'm content with this proposal. Trevor __

Re: Add function for overriding broken spanners to LilyPond. (issue 6397054)

David Nalesnik writes: > Oops!  Usually I remember to convert tabs to spaces (and trim > whitespace from the ends of lines), but > not here. >   > > The examples are nice and pretty much self-explanatory. > If fact, the only thing i don't like is that backticks are > necessary > i

Re: Google tracker quota for attachments

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Graham Percival wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:12:11PM -0700, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Graham Percival >> wrote: >> > Phil did this a few times. I'll let him sort it out with Colin >> >> was Phil successful? > > yes, althou

Re: Add function for overriding broken spanners to LilyPond. (issue 6397054)

Hi Janek, The only thing that > worries me is the indentation - there are some tabs used and > Frescobaldi displays them wrong (i suppose you meant 1 tab to be equal > to 4 spaces, not 8). > Oops! Usually I remember to convert tabs to spaces (and trim whitespace from the ends of lines), but not

Re: Web: remove non-Free software from Easier Editing (issue 6395049)

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:43 AM, wrote: > It's OK as it is, but why the commented out text that refers to non-free > software cannot be deleted? If it's because we want to be able to find > a reference by looking at the source, Git history will tell. +1

Re: Add function for overriding broken spanners to LilyPond. (issue 6397054)

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:17 AM, David Nalesnik wrote: > I took a look at this--I couldn't resist!!--and actually it wasn't too hard > to incorporate Harm's (very cool) snippet into \alterBroken. I've attached > a file which shows how his example would be expressed with that command. :D > I rea

Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

http://codereview.appspot.com/6398055/diff/1/Documentation/de/notation/repeats.itely File Documentation/de/notation/repeats.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6398055/diff/1/Documentation/de/notation/repeats.itely#newcode245 Documentation/de/notation/repeats.itely:245: @cindex ndex \in

Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:55:41PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > > > to remove any backslash from the sort-order but still print the > > backslash? > > We have @funindex, our own macro. If we use this (or something else) > consistently without backslash, the macro defi

Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

Graham Percival writes: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:24:06PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> Again: I don't see that Texinfo behavior precludes us from writing >> consistent input. Mapping this input to current Texinfo behavior is a >> matter of redefining a macro then. > > I don't see how this c

Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:24:06PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Again: I don't see that Texinfo behavior precludes us from writing > consistent input. Mapping this input to current Texinfo behavior is a > matter of redefining a macro then. I don't see how this can be done with a macro, but I'm q

Re: reopened Issue 2584: please make partcombine merge slurs (issue 6432047)

Reviewers: Trevor Daniels, Message: On 2012/07/19 09:30:15, Trevor Daniels wrote: Just nitpicking; can't comment substantively. Trevor http://codereview.appspot.com/6432047/diff/1/lily/phrasing-slur-engraver.cc File lily/phrasing-slur-engraver.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/

Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

Graham Percival writes: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:01:03AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> We can still decide on what we want to see in our source code. Matching >> that to the realities of an existing Texinfo implementation is then a >> matter of changing macros. > > Texinfo does not allow us

Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:01:03AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > We can still decide on what we want to see in our source code. Matching > that to the realities of an existing Texinfo implementation is then a > matter of changing macros. Texinfo does not allow us to sort abc \bcd cde inste

Re: Optional arguments of a music-function?

Thomas Morley writes: > 2012/7/17 David Kastrup : >> Thomas Morley writes: >> >>> Trying a code like the tiny example below fails. >>> >>> proc = >>> #(define-music-function (parser location name arg)((string?) ly:music?) >>> (if name >>> #{ \once \override $name #'color = #red $arg #} >>>

reopened Issue 2584: please make partcombine merge slurs (issue 6432047)

Just nitpicking; can't comment substantively. Trevor http://codereview.appspot.com/6432047/diff/1/lily/phrasing-slur-engraver.cc File lily/phrasing-slur-engraver.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6432047/diff/1/lily/phrasing-slur-engraver.cc#newcode256 lily/phrasing-slur-engraver.cc:2

Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

Graham Percival writes: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 07:45:58PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: >> - Original Message - From: "Ian Hulin" >> To: "Phil Holmes" >> Cc: >> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 6:48 PM >> Subject: Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055) >> >> >Implementation >>

Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 07:45:58PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: > - Original Message - From: "Ian Hulin" > To: "Phil Holmes" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 6:48 PM > Subject: Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055) > > >Implementation > > > > by a grown-up who understands

Web: remove non-Free software from Easier Editing (issue 6395049)

It's OK as it is, but why the commented out text that refers to non-free software cannot be deleted? If it's because we want to be able to find a reference by looking at the source, Git history will tell. http://codereview.appspot.com/6395049/ ___ lil