Graham Percival wrote:
It would also be a great opportunity to include an option for
alternative TeX-compilers, e.g. xelatex, not just pdflatex.
Patches appreciated.
Do you have a rough estimate of the challenges involved here?
___
lilypond-user
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 01:21:21PM +0100, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
Graham Percival wrote:
It would also be a great opportunity to include an option for
alternative TeX-compilers, e.g. xelatex, not just pdflatex.
Patches appreciated.
Do you have a rough estimate of the challenges
Graham Percival wrote:
If you know python, or don't count time learning it towards the
estaimte, then 5 hours for basic usability. Maybe 15 for using
advanced xelatex stuff?
Note that I don't know what the difference is between xelatex and
pdflatex; I'm just going on the fact that they
Joseph Wakeling wrote:
Graham Percival wrote:
If you know python, or don't count time learning it towards the
estaimte, then 5 hours for basic usability. Maybe 15 for using
advanced xelatex stuff?
Note that I don't know what the difference is between xelatex and
pdflatex; I'm just going
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 01:52:26PM +0100, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
Graham Percival wrote:
Not in this case.
Well, the point is that at least 1 user made the mistake of trying to
get LP to use the 'latest' Python -- maybe worth adding a line or two
mentioning not to do this and explaining
Graham Percival wrote:
By the way, I estimate that switching all our scripts to python
3.x would take 40 hours, with an additional 20 hours required to
make GUB include python 3.x in the installers.
I'm not much of a Pythonist alas, never mind the complexity of teaching
myself properly how the
IIRC I saw a bunch of changes by Jan some time ago to make our scripts
support both Python 2.x and 3.x - some of them may have inadvertently
be reverted.
I think it is possible to support both with some work, and some loss
of neatness in the code.
In particular, for one of the issues mentioned,
Op vrijdag 26-02-2010 om 16:16 uur [tijdzone -0300], schreef Han-Wen
Nienhuys:
IIRC I saw a bunch of changes by Jan some time ago to make our scripts
support both Python 2.x and 3.x
That's in GUB. I'm not sure if doing it for lilypond is quite that
easy.
If someone's interested, look at try
Am Freitag, 26. Februar 2010 20:16:11 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys:
IIRC I saw a bunch of changes by Jan some time ago to make our scripts
support both Python 2.x and 3.x - some of them may have inadvertently
be reverted.
I think it is possible to support both with some work, and some loss
of
Op vrijdag 26-02-2010 om 20:39 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Reinhold
Kainhofer:
Am Freitag, 26. Februar 2010 20:16:11 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys:
There are some incompatible changes
Yes, quite a few of them. So if you're interested look at the
solutions for those made in GUB.
Greetings,
Jan.
Am Freitag, 26. Februar 2010 20:52:51 schrieben Sie:
Op vrijdag 26-02-2010 om 20:39 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Reinhold
Kainhofer:
Am Freitag, 26. Februar 2010 20:16:11 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys:
There are some incompatible changes
Yes, quite a few of them. So if you're interested
Op vrijdag 26-02-2010 om 21:23 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Reinhold
Kainhofer:
Am Freitag, 26. Februar 2010 20:52:51 schrieben Sie:
Op vrijdag 26-02-2010 om 20:39 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Reinhold
Hmm, I don't see how I could easily write code (or different included files
like in
Hello,
I work on Microsoft Windows 7 (64 bit), have MiKTeX 2.8 and lilypond
2.12.3 installed and lilypond-book worked fine until I installed
Python 3.1.1.
Not knowing that Lilypond provides python 2.4.5 I was surprised that
after I installed Python 3.1.1 and ran python, an older version of
Sven Siegmund wrote:
Hello,
I work on Microsoft Windows 7 (64 bit), have MiKTeX 2.8 and lilypond
2.12.3 installed and lilypond-book worked fine until I installed
Python 3.1.1.
Not knowing that Lilypond provides python 2.4.5 I was surprised that
after I installed Python 3.1.1 and ran
Uninstall python 3, as it can override library paths.
Sven Siegmund wrote:
Hello,
I work on Microsoft Windows 7 (64 bit), have MiKTeX 2.8 and lilypond
2.12.3 installed and lilypond-book worked fine until I installed
Python 3.1.1.
Not knowing that Lilypond provides python 2.4.5 I was
Uninstall python 3, as it can override library paths.
But I really need Python 3. It is much more unicode-aware than Python
2.x. Is there any hope that Lilypond-book will be ported to python 3?
Python 3 has been over a year around, so maybe it's time to adapt the
source code of lilypond-book a
Sven Siegmund wrote:
Uninstall python 3, as it can override library paths.
But I really need Python 3. It is much more unicode-aware than Python
2.x. Is there any hope that Lilypond-book will be ported to python 3?
Python 3 has been over a year around, so maybe it's time to adapt the
source
I know that Python 3 and Python 2.x are two different worlds, and that
there are so many changes that must be done to the code that it would
mean to program lilypond-book again from scratch in Python 3, even
more if we consider that there is need to enhance its functionality
and make it work with
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:16:05PM +0100, Sven Siegmund wrote:
Uninstall python 3, as it can override library paths.
But I really need Python 3. It is much more unicode-aware than Python
2.x. Is there any hope that Lilypond-book will be ported to python 3?
Patches appreciated.
Python 3
19 matches
Mail list logo
