Reviewers: carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com, Neil Puttock,
http://codereview.appspot.com/970044/diff/1/2
File Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely (left):
http://codereview.appspot.com/970044/diff/1/2#oldcode38
Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely:38: * Music function
-Eluze wrote:
Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
So, do you have any idea how I can override the header and paper blocks
in a
global init file?
i have copied the whole init.ly to myInit.ly and then added *\include
myPaper.ly* right after the \maininput line (nr. 25 in version 2.13.18)
Am Donnerstag, 29. April 2010 12:01:14 schrieb -Eluze:
-Eluze wrote:
Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
So, do you have any idea how I can override the header and paper blocks
in a
global init file?
i have copied the whole init.ly to myInit.ly and then added *\include
myPaper.ly* right
David Kastrup:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
...
And what if you see \chordmode { c,4:1/c c g,:1/g c } in the input
(which is basically how you put bass notes in now if you really must)?
...
For the simple chords c\maj c\dim c\maj7 etc. could suffice.
For more complex chords
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 01:33:42PM +0200, Karl Hammar wrote:
David Kastrup:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
...
And what if you see \chordmode { c,4:1/c c g,:1/g c } in the input
(which is basically how you put bass notes in now if you really must)?
...
For the simple
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
But I think we could use ; in LilyPond, even though it's used for comments
in Scheme, because the ; inside a scheme function aren't interpreted by the
LilyPond parser, IIUC.
I like ';' very much (mostly because it feels
c 3 5
I like this
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 4/29/10 1:42 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
Carl,
you didn't reply to all, but here's my response anyway:
Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to not reply to all. Thanks for covering for
me.
- Mark
Carl Sorensen wrote:
I disagree with the idea that the simplest solution
Sending to list for completeness.
On 4/28/10 12:39 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
It struck me that there are more options for dealing with
the \relative inside \repeat issue. Can someone look over
this to make sure I'm not doing anything sacrililygious?
In my opinion, the
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
If you want to use the minumum number of { and indentation levels, you can
write
\context Voice \repeat unfold 2 \relative c' { c2 d }
or
\context Voice \repeat unfold 2 \relative c' {
c2 d
}
but back when the
I like the new suggestions. Just a couple of comments.
http://codereview.appspot.com/970044/diff/1/2
File Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely (left):
http://codereview.appspot.com/970044/diff/1/2#oldcode38
Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely:38: * Music
On 4/29/10 7:12 AM, Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote:
c 3 5
I like this
Why c 3 5 instead of c e g?
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
I think I really like this. It allows a transparent definition of what is
meant by a chord that is really easy to override.
But
c 3 5
I like this
Why c 3 5 instead of c e g?
Honestly, I'm just looking at the syntax form, not how to use it. It
simply looks good to me from a syntactical point of view. Whether
it's praktical or not, I don't know. I've never used chord mode.
Werner
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
c 3 5
I like this
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
It is not clear to me how this would extend to
\chordmode {
c1:7+ c:5+.3- c:3-.5-.7-
}
\chordmode {
c1:sus c:sus2 c:sus4 c:5.4^3
}
\chordmode {
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 4/29/10 7:12 AM, Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote:
c 3 5
I like this
Why c 3 5 instead of c e g?
Because bes 3 5 requires less brain than what it would need to be.
--
David Kastrup
___
---
lily/parser.yy |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lily/parser.yy b/lily/parser.yy
index 99e15a4..ac0d357 100644
--- a/lily/parser.yy
+++ b/lily/parser.yy
@@ -1077,7 +1077,7 @@ function_scm_argument:
;
/* An argument list. If a function \foo
Dear list,
does lilypond have something No tonality at all switch which ensures no
key signature at all is printed in a situation like this:
\crazyatonalmusic
\tranpose c fis \crazyatonalmusic
???
I am getting 6 flats for this, which is not useful since crazyatonalmusic
wants to be
On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
c 3 5
I like this
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
It is not clear to me how this would extend to
\chordmode {
c1:7+ c:5+.3- c:3-.5-.7-
}
\relative c' {
On 4/29/10 10:17 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
c 3 5
I like this
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
Or, when we define \sus4 to be equivalent to \chord #'(1
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
Have you tested your patch with other PDF viewers to verify that the
behavior is not worse with them?
I've tested with Foxit Reader and Adobe Reader. The behavior with Foxit is
improved; Lilypond can overwrite the PDF,
Hi,
I am currently reworking the markup command parsing. We have something
like
The available combinations of arguments (after the standard @var{layout}
and @var{props} arguments) to a markup command defined with
@code{define-markup-command} are limited as follows.
@table @asis
@item (no
Le 29 avr. 2010 à 20:27, David Kastrup a écrit :
What type signatures would be actually permissable under the assumption
that they are supported by lexer and parser?
It is somewhat clear to me that we can't have markup-list followed by
markup in the arguments. Anything else?
I'd say, a
Graham:
...
OTOH, what about doing something like this:
c\maj
c\dim
c\chord #'(1 4 5)
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this.
Regards,
/Karl Hammar
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Am Donnerstag, 29. April 2010 22:20:27 schrieb Karl Hammar:
Graham:
...
OTOH, what about doing something like this:
c\maj
c\dim
We already have \dim for text diminuendo...
Cheers,
Reinhold
--
--
Reinhold Kainhofer,
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:11:13PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote:
Speaking of which, I often wished we had a cool shortcut for writing
repeats using a postfix syntax, e.g.
{ large music expression here };4
instead of
\repeat unfold 4 { large music expression }
That would already be handled
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 08:55:13AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
But we'll need to be sure it handles things like
c\chord #'(1 3- 5-)
Hmm. Might we need
c\chord #'(1 3++ 7--)
? I'm not prepared to claim that there's no theory of chords that
includes doubly-augmented intervals relative to
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:17:51AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
It's nice, but a single mode where the full power of
voicing _and_ chords is available similarly convenient would be
preferable to me. Making chordmode and musicmode
On 4/29/10 2:42 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 08:55:13AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
But we'll need to be sure it handles things like
c\chord #'(1 3- 5-)
Hmm. Might we need
c\chord #'(1 3++ 7--)
? I'm not prepared to claim that there's
On 29 April 2010 21:36, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:11:13PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote:
Speaking of which, I often wished we had a cool shortcut for writing
repeats using a postfix syntax, e.g.
{ large music expression here };4
instead of
On 4/29/10 2:48 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:17:51AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
It's nice, but a single mode where the full power of
voicing _and_ chords is available similarly
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 02:51:59PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/29/10 2:42 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
c\chord #'(4 1 3 5)
I'm not entirely comfortable about have 4 1.
I'm totally comfortable with #'(4 1 3 5). I can easily parse that so that
steps that
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 4/29/10 2:42 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 08:55:13AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
But we'll need to be sure it handles things like
c\chord #'(1 3- 5-)
Hmm. Might we need
c\chord #'(1 3++ 7--)
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:02:08PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
OK. I guess I was looking at this as a step to eliminating the *need* for
chordmode and deprecating it (as was suggested by David originally). Of
course chordmode won't be eliminated until 3.0 (because we're in a syntax
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:14:43PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
There is at least one common chord that uses doubly altered steps: the
dim7 chord, which uses a double-flatted 7th., along with a minor thrd
and a diminished fifth. So yes, we do need
Hi all,
It's not obvious to me whether
c\chord #'(1 7)
should produce c b or c bes. Musically speaking, I'd look at
the key signature; if it were c major, I would assume it meant
c b since b is the seventh note of the scale.
This may be a problem for the numeric syntax. I suppose we
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 05:27:36PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi all,
It's not obvious to me whether
c\chord #'(1 7)
should produce c b or c bes. Musically speaking, I'd look at
Or... we could use dodecaphonic intervals, i.e.
c\chord #'(1 11) is a minor seventh
c\chord
On 4/29/10 3:12 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 02:51:59PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/29/10 2:42 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
c\chord #'(4 1 3 5)
I'm not entirely comfortable about have 4 1.
I'm totally
Hi Graham,
And have you decided whether this should just go in the
@knownissues on that page, or should it be a separate section?
I think it should be in the @knownissues.
That's just it -- there isn't anybody to guide you gently into
that good night. The only clue I know about the IR is
Reviewers: Neil Puttock,
http://codereview.appspot.com/956051/diff/1/3
File lily/slur-scoring.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/956051/diff/1/3#newcode86
lily/slur-scoring.cc:86: Slur_score_state::slur_direction (Grob *me)
const
On 2010/04/29 22:40:10, Neil Puttock wrote:
Do you need
On 4/27/10 10:49 PM, Nathan Reed nathaniel.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Lilypond would attempt to delete the output PDF before overwriting it in
Windows
(but no other platforms). This is unnecessary and causes problems with
certain
PDF viewers, e.g. Sumatra, where the PDF is kept open in a way
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm afraid I couldn't resist testing this, so if you're interested,
try the attached patch.
That's great! You might also want to include simultaneous music
(...*4). Thanks!
-Jay
Jay Anderson horndud...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm afraid I couldn't resist testing this, so if you're interested,
try the attached patch.
That's great! You might also want to include simultaneous music
(...*4). Thanks!
42 matches
Mail list logo
