On 12/30/10 2:07 PM, "Felipe Gonçalves Assis" <felipeg.as...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Issue 1278 (http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1278)
> clarified that, in order to support some microtonal notations, LilyPond
> needs to use a different pitch representation.
>
> I am willing to make that happen. Of course, this will require some
> contribution from more experienced developers. That being said,
> this contribution needs to be no more than objective discussions
> about well-defined questions and, at the end, a patch review.
Hi, Felipe.
I've looked at your patch, but I'm having a bit of trouble seeing how the
patch resolves the issues that are identified in issue 1278.
I must admit that i've not yet fully understood Hans's emails on issue 1278.
How do your new two-element alterations improve the situation?
>
> Could you, please, help me with that?
>
> This thread is for such discussions. I intend to address issues
> sequentially and generally in a top-down direction.
>
> A useful reference will be the experimental patch I just posted
> on Rietveld: http://codereview.appspot.com/3789044/
>
> Please try it, and take a look at it if possible, but do not start
> commenting the code before we agree on the fundamentals.
> We might end up with a quite different version of that.
>
It would be very helpful for me to discuss this patch if you had a test file
that shows how the new features are used.
It would be even better if there were a test file that compiled but didn't
behave properly in 2.13.44, and then a corresponding file that does behave
properly in your patch.
Thanks,
Carl
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
