Re: \times -> \tuplet
> > I favour a convert-ly rule. Why not? > > If we "officially" allow the old \times command as an alias, then > people who want to keep on using the \times rule will be pissed > when convert-ly automatically changes their 500 .ly files. Hmm. Then I favour not an official alias, but \times as deprecated. Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: \times -> \tuplet
2008/1/27, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I am still very much opposed to this as a mandatory change. Aliasing > > > times to tuplet would be great. > > > > Yes. > > Would this aliasing include a convert-ly rule, or not? That's > going to be impossible to resolve. > > > > \times syntax and have never had any problem confusing it with > > > \time. \tuplet is longer to type and falls much more strangely on > > > the keyboard than does \times. > > > > Only a native English speaker can say that \time is difficult to mix > > up with \times. I think that my English is not very bad, and I still > > sometimes mix them up. > > I /am/ a native English speaker, and I still screw up \time and > \times. And don't forget about people who don't understand > English at all, and only read the translated docs. Noticing (and > remembering!) the difference between \time and \times is not easy. > > There isn't much difference in typing \tuplet vs. \times. On a > normal english keyboard (ie US-104 key), hitting the \ occupies > the most time. The rest isn't much of a factor. > > > That said, I don't think we have enough agreement to go ahead with > this. *sigh* Maybe next year... It's actually not that difficult to do (and I'll probably have a go at this if noone else does), but things like this do require some care to verify that everything continues to work. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Postponed Bugs #83 and #297: "a Someone Else Problem"
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: Juergen (CC-d) is the person who wrote the ligature code, including the one for the brackets. Yepp, ages ago (around early 2002)... I'm looking at the issues now, but there is something I don't understand. The ligature events are implemented as 'command-event', like \bar and \time, which fall in between the notes.This is inconsistent with start/stop commands like [ ] , but I can't really judge if that is the best way to do it. Hmmh, I don't understand. In Lily 2.7.x, in define-music-types.scm, LigatureEvent has "(types . (general-music span-event ligature-event event))", i.e. it is a SpanEvent, or am I missing something? In Lily 2.11.x, it is implemented as StreamEvent, due to Erik's changes. How is this related to "command-event" (which, btw, I could not find in the sources)? For issue 297, I can change the formatting to end exactly on the last note; would that solve the problem? Juergen? Probably yes, at least in many cases, as far as I understand. 2008/1/27, Robert Memering wrote If this is the case, is there any chance I might sponsor fixing this bug? Speaking for me personally, it's more a problem of time lacking rather than of sponsoring (I even did not yet get acquainted with the git versioning system)... But there may be other people interested. And, by the way, as I haven't been involved in Lilypond development: Who is Juergen? Me! :-) (Oh, you are right, it's difficult to find me on the web, since my old home page unfortunately died a while ago; there is now a new one at www.juergen-reuter.de). Greetings, Juergen ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: \times -> \tuplet
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 23:57:55 +0100
Rune Zedeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Graham Percival skrev:
> > OTOH, those people are probably more technically inclined than
> > those who will move to the new \tuplet command, so they can write
> > their own python script to change all the new \tuplet back into
> > \times. We could even add that script to LSR...
>
> IMO the nice way to do this would be to add a "conservative"-option
> to convert-ly. When conservative is on, convert-ly tries to stay as
> close as possible to the old syntax (i.e. keeping "times"), when
> conservative is off, it tries to use as many of the new constructs as
> it can (ie. translating times->tuplet). Of course we "could" (sigh)
> expand the use of the conservative option to lots of other
> constructs.
Like \relative { => \relative c' {
> This would take a lot of time, but adding the skeleton,
> i.e. reading the option from the command line and making it
> accessible from the convert-ly-rules could afaics be quickly done by
> a python-hacker.
Well, this is always the problem with open-source: it takes to
time implement new features, and then it takes time to maintain
them. (that said, this could probably be done in such a way that
maintenance is not an issue)
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: \times -> \tuplet
Graham Percival skrev: OTOH, those people are probably more technically inclined than those who will move to the new \tuplet command, so they can write their own python script to change all the new \tuplet back into \times. We could even add that script to LSR... IMO the nice way to do this would be to add a "conservative"-option to convert-ly. When conservative is on, convert-ly tries to stay as close as possible to the old syntax (i.e. keeping "times"), when conservative is off, it tries to use as many of the new constructs as it can (ie. translating times->tuplet). Of course we "could" (sigh) expand the use of the conservative option to lots of other constructs. This would take a lot of time, but adding the skeleton, i.e. reading the option from the command line and making it accessible from the convert-ly-rules could afaics be quickly done by a python-hacker. I still vote against the times->tuplet thing, but if we decide to do it nevertheless then this is imo the best way. -Rune ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: \times -> \tuplet
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 23:31:53 +0100 (CET) Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Would this aliasing include a convert-ly rule, or not? That's > > going to be impossible to resolve. > > I favour a convert-ly rule. Why not? If we "officially" allow the old \times command as an alias, then people who want to keep on using the \times rule will be pissed when convert-ly automatically changes their 500 .ly files. OTOH, those people are probably more technically inclined than those who will move to the new \tuplet command, so they can write their own python script to change all the new \tuplet back into \times. We could even add that script to LSR... I just know that we'll have people who don't know how to use the command line complaining about this. Bottom line: we can't please everybody with this. All we can do is choose who, and how much, to annoy. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: \times -> \tuplet
> Would this aliasing include a convert-ly rule, or not? That's > going to be impossible to resolve. I favour a convert-ly rule. Why not? Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Postponed Bugs #83 and #297: "a Someone Else Problem"
Juergen (CC-d) is the person who wrote the ligature code, including the one for the brackets. I'm looking at the issues now, but there is something I don't understand. The ligature events are implemented as 'command-event', like \bar and \time, which fall in between the notes.This is inconsistent with start/stop commands like [ ] , but I can't really judge if that is the best way to do it. For issue 297, I can change the formatting to end exactly on the last note; would that solve the problem? Juergen? 2008/1/27, Robert Memering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Dear Lilypond developers, > > I am preparing some sophisticated scores of > renaissance vocal music and I am severely affected > by the problems with ligature brackets described > in issue #83 and #297 of the bug tracker. (I can > send examples much uglier than in the bug tracker if > anyone is interested.) > > In #83 it says: "Contibuted code by Juergen, > ie. a 'Someone Else Problem'". Does this mean > that it won't get fixed unless by Juergen? > > If this is the case, is there any chance I might > sponsor fixing this bug? I am using Lilypond for > a commercial job, and I'm afraid I cannot deliver > the scores in the present state. However, I might > be able to contribute a substantial amount of money > if the issues could be fixed. > > And, by the way, as I haven't been involved in > Lilypond development: Who is Juergen? > > Best regards, > Robert > > > -- > Robert Memering > Arbeitsbereich Linguistik, Universität Münster > Hüfferstraße 27, D-48149 Münster, Germany > Raum 01.85, Tel. +49-251-83-31958 > http://santana.uni-muenster.de > > > ___ > lilypond-devel mailing list > lilypond-devel@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel > -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: \times -> \tuplet
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:58:21 +0100 (CET) Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There has already been a *huge* thread on the -user list about > > > this, and the conclusion was that the only realistic change we > > > could do was renaming \times to \tuplet, and nothing else; > > > I am still very much opposed to this as a mandatory change. Aliasing > > times to tuplet would be great. > > Yes. Would this aliasing include a convert-ly rule, or not? That's going to be impossible to resolve. > > \times syntax and have never had any problem confusing it with > > \time. \tuplet is longer to type and falls much more strangely on > > the keyboard than does \times. > > Only a native English speaker can say that \time is difficult to mix > up with \times. I think that my English is not very bad, and I still > sometimes mix them up. I /am/ a native English speaker, and I still screw up \time and \times. And don't forget about people who don't understand English at all, and only read the translated docs. Noticing (and remembering!) the difference between \time and \times is not easy. There isn't much difference in typing \tuplet vs. \times. On a normal english keyboard (ie US-104 key), hitting the \ occupies the most time. The rest isn't much of a factor. That said, I don't think we have enough agreement to go ahead with this. *sigh* Maybe next year... Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: version in commit 3b7d631201dca7902620d79e83b7e37141040af3
Thanks, fixed. Cheers, - Graham On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:04:04 +0100 Wilbert Berendsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > diff --git a/ly/property-init.ly b/ly/property-init.ly > > -\version "2.10.0" > +\version "2.7.38" > > shouldn't that be 2.11.38 ? > > w best regards, > Wilbert Berendsen > > -- > http://www.wilbertberendsen.nl/ > "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." > -- Mahatma Gandi > > > ___ > lilypond-devel mailing list > lilypond-devel@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: \times -> \tuplet
> > There has already been a *huge* thread on the -user list about > > this, and the conclusion was that the only realistic change we > > could do was renaming \times to \tuplet, and nothing else; Yes; even if it's mathematical nonsense, the nominator/denominator order shouldn't change. > I am still very much opposed to this as a mandatory change. Aliasing > times to tuplet would be great. Yes. > \times syntax and have never had any problem confusing it with > \time. \tuplet is longer to type and falls much more strangely on > the keyboard than does \times. Only a native English speaker can say that \time is difficult to mix up with \times. I think that my English is not very bad, and I still sometimes mix them up. Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: \times -> \tuplet (was Re: Issue 566 in lilypond: showStaffSwitch -> \staffSwitchOn)
John Mandereau wrote: There has already been a *huge* thread on the -user list about this, and the conclusion was that the only realistic change we could do was renaming \times to \tuplet, and nothing else; the point of my remark in the bug tracker was to ask developers' opinion about actually doing this, and not about reopening the discussion -- unless you have new ideas, of course. I am still very much opposed to this as a mandatory change. Aliasing times to tuplet would be great. But I've spent a long time with the \times syntax and have never had any problem confusing it with \time. \tuplet is longer to type and falls much more strangely on the keyboard than does \times. Times is mathematically precise and describes exactly what is happening when the keyword is applied. If there is such an overwhelming problem with the confusion (and I still have trouble believing that to be the case), then an alias should be created, but we should not remove the \times keyword. Cheers, Bryan... ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
version in commit 3b7d631201dca7902620d79e83b7e37141040af3
diff --git a/ly/property-init.ly b/ly/property-init.ly -\version "2.10.0" +\version "2.7.38" shouldn't that be 2.11.38 ? w best regards, Wilbert Berendsen -- http://www.wilbertberendsen.nl/ "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -- Mahatma Gandi ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Postponed Bugs #83 and #297: "a Someone Else Problem"
Dear Lilypond developers, I am preparing some sophisticated scores of renaissance vocal music and I am severely affected by the problems with ligature brackets described in issue #83 and #297 of the bug tracker. (I can send examples much uglier than in the bug tracker if anyone is interested.) In #83 it says: "Contibuted code by Juergen, ie. a 'Someone Else Problem'". Does this mean that it won't get fixed unless by Juergen? If this is the case, is there any chance I might sponsor fixing this bug? I am using Lilypond for a commercial job, and I'm afraid I cannot deliver the scores in the present state. However, I might be able to contribute a substantial amount of money if the issues could be fixed. And, by the way, as I haven't been involved in Lilypond development: Who is Juergen? Best regards, Robert -- Robert Memering Arbeitsbereich Linguistik, Universität Münster Hüfferstraße 27, D-48149 Münster, Germany Raum 01.85, Tel. +49-251-83-31958 http://santana.uni-muenster.de ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
\times -> \tuplet (was Re: Issue 566 in lilypond: showStaffSwitch -> \staffSwitchOn)
[moved from bug-lilypond to -devel]
Le dimanche 27 janvier 2008 à 13:17 +0100, Hans Aberg a écrit :
> On 27 Jan 2008, at 12:23, Graham Percival wrote:
>
> >> And what about renaming \times to \tuplet? ;)
> >
> > I think that everybody agreed with it. Some people wanted a weird
> > \tuplet 3:4 { } syntax as well, but after discussion it was
> > pointed out that this wouldn't work in scheme.
> >
> > Certainly everybody agreed that \times -> \tuplet was good.
> > However... since this change _will_ change so many files, could
> > you prepare a diff and/or push to your local git branch, then
> > check on -devel for any last-minute objections?
I don't think preparing such a simple (i.e. without the result of
running convert-ly) patch is needed; let's wait for a few days for any
objections, then let's make the change, as for #563 and #564.
> Note the difference:
>\times 3/4 {...}
> means a quadruplet, though in music, it would be more natural to write
>\tuplet 4/3 {...}
> or
>\tuplet 4:3 {...}
> (I think this may make a difference in some more complex situations,
> but I do not recall any immediate example.)
There has already been a *huge* thread on the -user list about this, and
the conclusion was that the only realistic change we could do was
renaming \times to \tuplet, and nothing else; the point of my remark in
the bug tracker was to ask developers' opinion about actually doing
this, and not about reopening the discussion -- unless you have new
ideas, of course.
Cheers,
John
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
