Re: Fix Issue 1035 -- Add context property for negative frets (issue4056041)

[Carl . D . Sorensen]

On 2011/02/02 23:55:59, Neil Puttock wrote:

LGTM.



Just needs rebasing (I assume you don't want to delete
tablature-dot-placement.ly)


Done



http://codereview.appspot.com/4056041/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[Keith OHara]

On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:43:38 -0800,  wrote:


not a patch comment, but I'm intrigued -- how often do you think that
people use automatic ties?


I had never used them or seen them used.
But the moment I started playing with \retrograde, on a melody that did not 
fill an integral number of measures, I wanted automatic ties.


 And why does this code work with the
Completion_heads_engraver but not manual ties?


Only the starting points of ties are stored in the internal representation, as 
seen with \displayMusic.  After the music is reversed, the tie event is 
attached to the second note rather than the first, so it breaks.  This is in 
contrast to slurs which have a begin and an end event, thoughtfully reversed by 
the code implementing \retrograde.

If we choose to depend on automatic ties, we can simply write long note-values, 
which have no problem with being reversed, and let the engraver set the ties on 
the result.

-Keith


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Tweaks regtest and adds avoid-collisions property (issue4022045)

[m...@apollinemike.com]

On Feb 3, 2011, at 8:56 PM, Graham Percival wrote:

> On 2/4/11, m...@apollinemike.com  wrote:
>> On Feb 3, 2011, at 7:33 PM, hanw...@gmail.com wrote:
>> 
>>> could you make a separate patch for the engraver, fixing the issue
>>> below; I think the engraver can go in without further discussion.
>> 
>> Done & attached, but I don't know if it's a good idea to put an engraver in
>> the source that doesn't do anything yet.
> 
> Well, it passes a regtest check.  ;)
> In all seriousness, it may well be worth pushing it just to keep
> things organized, have everybody working from a common base, etc.
> 
> Cheers,
> - Graham

That works too!  We just have to make sure to make a note in the docs if it 
winds up being part of 2.14 without any real beam collision.  Otherwise, if 
people try to figure out the logic of the program by reading through the source 
(which is how I have a quarter of the half clue I currently have about what's 
going on), they may get confused.

I found a Ligeti example that I also threw up on the site w/ the other beam 
collision examples - it's a minefield for voice crossing, some of which pushes 
the beam up by as much as a 5th.

Cheers,
MS
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Tweaks regtest and adds avoid-collisions property (issue4022045)

[Graham Percival]

On 2/4/11, m...@apollinemike.com  wrote:
> On Feb 3, 2011, at 7:33 PM, hanw...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> could you make a separate patch for the engraver, fixing the issue
>> below; I think the engraver can go in without further discussion.
>
> Done & attached, but I don't know if it's a good idea to put an engraver in
> the source that doesn't do anything yet.

Well, it passes a regtest check.  ;)
In all seriousness, it may well be worth pushing it just to keep
things organized, have everybody working from a common base, etc.

Cheers,
- Graham

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[percival . music . ca]

LGTM.  I don't think you need to wait until Sat.


http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/3009/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/3009/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode840
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:840: A motif can be transposed
within a given scale with
colon please:

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/3009/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode851
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:851: diatonicScale = \relative c' {
c d e f g a b }
(incidentally, only my first reading of the patch, I didn't notice that
stuff like \diatonicScale was created in the examples; I thought they
were getting defined in a scm file or something.  If I'd noticed that, I
wouldn't have bothered nitpicking about the names)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/3009/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode903
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:903: note with
Colon please:

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/3009/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode933
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:933: A motif can be reversed to
produce its retrograde with
ditto:

although in this case, I really don't think we need an @example.  I
mean,
  \retograde \music-expression
is pretty clear.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/3009/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode972
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:972: Manual ties inside
@code{\retrograde} will be broken and
not a patch comment, but I'm intrigued -- how often do you think that
people use automatic ties?  And why does this code work with the
Completion_heads_engraver but not manual ties?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/3009/input/regression/modal-transforms.ly
File input/regression/modal-transforms.ly (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/3009/input/regression/modal-transforms.ly#newcode9
input/regression/modal-transforms.ly:9: ges' aes' a' b'
heh, I thought that after so many people reviewing it, there'd be
nothing "substantial" left to comment on.

missing duration:
  ges'4
:)


oh wait, this is a regtest, not the docs.  ok, never mind, we're not
fussy about input code syntax here.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Tweaks regtest and adds avoid-collisions property (issue4022045)

[m...@apollinemike.com]

On Feb 3, 2011, at 7:33 PM, hanw...@gmail.com wrote:

> Hey Mike,
> 
> could you make a separate patch for the engraver, fixing the issue
> below; I think the engraver can go in without further discussion.
> 
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045/diff/12001/lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc
> File lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc (right):
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045/diff/12001/lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc#newcode107
> lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc:107: }
> I think you are adding the note heads of the beam itself here as well.
> Can you make sure you only do that for noteheads from other voices?
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045/

Done & attached, but I don't know if it's a good idea to put an engraver in the 
source that doesn't do anything yet.  That said, I don't mind sharing it as a 
patch if you (or anyone else) wants to build work off of it.

Cheers,
MS


0002-Adds-beam-collision-engraver.patch
Description: Binary data
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Tweaks regtest and adds avoid-collisions property (issue4022045)

[hanwenn]

Hey Mike,

could you make a separate patch for the engraver, fixing the issue
below; I think the engraver can go in without further discussion.


http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045/diff/12001/lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc
File lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045/diff/12001/lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc#newcode107
lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc:107: }
I think you are adding the note heads of the beam itself here as well.
Can you make sure you only do that for noteheads from other voices?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Optimize beam scoring. (issue4129047)

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:03 PM,   wrote:
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4129047/diff/1003/lily/beam-quanting.cc#oldcode249
> lily/beam-quanting.cc:249: scores->clear ();
> I have absolutely no knowledge of this code or algorithm, but are you
> certain you want to delete this line?

It doesn't really make a difference.  The function is called with an
empty vector anyway.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[Benkő Pál]

>> I think for these purposes all church modes are equivalent.
>> the different minor scales are truly different.
>
> Don't some church modes have an optional flat?

that's the concern of musica ficta, no need to handle it here.

>>> For pentatonic scales there are even more in common use,
>>> I believe. Even the five black-key scales are all distinct.
>>
>> but are equivalent, just as the church modes are equivalent
>> for diatonic transpositions and mirroring.
>
> Of course, you're right about the black-key scales, which
> is the pentatonic scale I've used.  But they can still be
> defined with different note names.  Which would we choose?

a c d e g (since it's symmetric; for the same reason my choice
for diatonic scale is a b c d e f g).

p

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 07:04:03PM +, Bernard Hurley wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 07:42:21PM +0100, Xavier Scheuer wrote:
> > On 3 February 2011 16:36, Mike Solomon  wrote:
> > >
> > > I have scanned examples from Boulez's Third Piano Sonata, Elliot Carter's
> > > Night Fantasies, Elliot Carter's Sonata, and Stockhausen's Klavierstücke 
> > > II
> > > & IV.  However, I don't want to go to jail for sending out a link to the
> > > LilyPond devel list where these scans are posted.  How should I go about
> > > sharing it w/ all interested parties & staying w/in the realm of what's
> > > legal @ the same time?
> > 
> > I could be considered as "small quotation" (or "fair use" in American law),
> > isn't it?

It might be considered as such.  In America.  Do we only have
Americans reading this email list?

> I assume the examples are fairly small, less than a page. What I
> would do is to make them as small as possible for illustrating
> your point. Then I can't see how this can be anything other than
> "fair use". As a courtesy it might be worth writing to the
> publishers and telling them what you are doing. It's a long time
> since I worked for a music publisher, but I can't see them
> having any objections. You can also butter them up a bit by
> saying they are "examples of best practice"

We're not putting these examples on the mailing list.  We're
certainly not putting them on our website or documentation.

One academic is making a tiny scan of some notation, in order to
send them privately to other academics (I believe that everybody
who is seriously involved in this discussion has a PhD!  -- note
that I am not seriously involved).  These are not publicly
accessible.

You do not need to write to music publishers.  Just send the
maoing 50kb jpg file to Han-Wen, Werner, Reinhold, Keith, and
whoever is involved in writing/reviewing code for this notation
feature which you are working on.

Cheers,
- Graham

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[Bernard Hurley]

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 07:42:21PM +0100, Xavier Scheuer wrote:
> On 3 February 2011 16:36, Mike Solomon  wrote:
> >
> > Hey all,
> > I have scanned examples from Boulez's Third Piano Sonata, Elliot Carter's
> > Night Fantasies, Elliot Carter's Sonata, and Stockhausen's Klavierstücke II
> > & IV.  However, I don't want to go to jail for sending out a link to the
> > LilyPond devel list where these scans are posted.  How should I go about
> > sharing it w/ all interested parties & staying w/in the realm of what's
> > legal @ the same time?
> 
> I could be considered as "small quotation" (or "fair use" in American law),
> isn't it?
> 

I assume the examples are fairly small, less than a page. What I would do is to 
make them as small as possible for illustrating your point. Then I can't see 
how this can be anything other than "fair use". As a courtesy it might be worth 
writing to the publishers and telling them what you are doing. It's a long time 
since I worked for a music publisher, but I can't see them having any 
objections. You can also butter them up a bit by saying they are "examples of 
best practice"

 /Bernard

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 13.47 regtests

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 06:34:55PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> Has anyone checked them?

Probably not.

Also, there's currently 16 issues to verify.  Including some
Critical issues.  All the bug squad needed to do was to copy&paste
and example and check if it crashes or not.

I want to start building the second release candidate in 24 hours,
but that would be silly if we have this many unconfirmed "fixed
bugs".

- Graham

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Fix 1120 in a way to avoid issues 1472, 1474 (issue4095041)

[percival . music . ca]

Latest version LGTM.

Keith, could you send me the git-format patch privately, so that I can
push it in 24 hours if nobody complains?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4095041/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[Xavier Scheuer]

On 3 February 2011 16:36, Mike Solomon  wrote:
>
> Hey all,
> I have scanned examples from Boulez's Third Piano Sonata, Elliot Carter's
> Night Fantasies, Elliot Carter's Sonata, and Stockhausen's Klavierstücke II
> & IV.  However, I don't want to go to jail for sending out a link to the
> LilyPond devel list where these scans are posted.  How should I go about
> sharing it w/ all interested parties & staying w/in the realm of what's
> legal @ the same time?

I could be considered as "small quotation" (or "fair use" in American law),
isn't it?

Cheers,
Xavier

-- 
Xavier Scheuer 

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

13.47 regtests

[Phil Holmes]

Has anyone checked them?

--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: FW: about compiling LilyPond

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 02:17:07PM +, James Lowe wrote:

Thanks for forwarding this, James.

> From: 章向?( [mailto:zhangxy290626...@gmail.com]

Zhang: please respond to the mailing list, and put your responses
inline.  Do not top-post.

> Sent: 03 February 2011 14:06
> To: James Lowe
> Subject: Re: about compiling LilyPond
> 
> I have seen this web page, but I couldn't find what I want. I find that 
> during the make process, it seems to do some testing and occurs some internal 
> errors. I don't konw whether it is necessary, and if I can skip this for 
> saving time.

If you compile with
  make -jX
then sometimes there are errors for no good reason.  Try repeating
the same make -jX , and if it happens three times in a row then
something is actually wrong with the code.

These errors do not occur the first time you compile from source;
they only appear when you're compiling a "partially-compiled"
tree.

Other than those "false errors", it is generally safe to use a
partially-compiled source tree when doing git-bisect.  The big
exceptions are changes to the build system (very infrequent), and
changes to fonts (also infrequent).


On my core2duo desktop with 4gb ram, it takes 5-10 minutes to
compile lilypond at each step of git bisect (it depends on how
much code has changed between each step).  There is no easy/safe
way to reduce that compilation time.

I assume that you are familiar with our git-bisect instructions in
the 2.13.47 version of the Contributor's Guide.  If not, please
read them.

Cheers,
- Graham

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Tweaks regtest and adds avoid-collisions property (issue4022045)

[percival . music . ca]

I can confirm that the regtests are fine.

The patch applies cleanly to master, but doesn't apply completely clean
if you apply Han-Wen's beaming priority queue.  That's not a complaint
about this patch; I'm just noting it in case anybody wants to test the
two together, or in case Han-Wen pushes the beaming priority queue soon.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[Trevor Daniels]

Benkő Pál wrote Thursday, February 03, 2011 3:28 PM


I think for these purposes all church modes are equivalent.
the different minor scales are truly different.


Don't some church modes have an optional flat?


For pentatonic scales there are even more in common use,
I believe. Even the five black-key scales are all distinct.


but are equivalent, just as the church modes are equivalent
for diatonic transpositions and mirroring.


Of course, you're right about the black-key scales, which
is the pentatonic scale I've used.  But they can still be
defined with different note names.  Which would we choose?


(I'm waiting eagerly for these features, no matter whether there
are preinstalled definitions in -init.ly files or not; they are a 
lot nicer

than my hacks for diatonic mirroring!)


I think the revision is pretty well complete now.  If
there are no further comments I'll push this on Saturday.
All the comments have been on the documentation anyway.
Mike's code looks good.

Whatever we decide about defining some scales I'd want
to make that a separate patch anyway, so we don't have
to wait for this discussion to crystallise.

Trevor





___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[m...@apollinemike.com]

On Feb 3, 2011, at 11:02 AM, Mike Solomon wrote:

> Sounds good...Han-Wen (or whoever), shoot me an e-mail for the scores.  They 
> are all scanned from the University of Florida library, so they don't belong 
> to me, but I use them for my research, of which nearly 100% is tied to 
> LilyPond in some way shape or form.
> 
> Cheers,
> MS
> 
> On Feb 3, 2011, at 10:55 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> 
>> Mike Solomon  writes:
>> 
>>> Hey all,
>>> 
>>> I have scanned examples from Boulez's Third Piano Sonata, Elliot
>>> Carter's Night Fantasies, Elliot Carter's Sonata, and Stockhausen's
>>> Klavierstücke II & IV.  However, I don't want to go to jail for
>>> sending out a link to the LilyPond devel list where these scans are
>>> posted.  How should I go about sharing it w/ all interested parties &
>>> staying w/in the realm of what's legal @ the same time?
>> 
>> You wait for someone you know to contact you via personal mail for the
>> purpose of helping you with your task.  As long as they need the scans
>> to work on a task commissioned by you, that should be reasonably within
>> the confines of fair use as long as you are in legal possession of the
>> requisite originals.
>> 
>> Of course, this is at best an unqualified opinion and must not be
>> confused with binding legal advice.
>> 
>> -- 
>> David Kastrup
>> 

Clean regtests.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045

Cheers,
MS

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Optimize beam scoring. (issue4129047)

[percival . music . ca]

I can confirm the clean regtest.


http://codereview.appspot.com/4129047/diff/1003/lily/beam-quanting.cc
File lily/beam-quanting.cc (left):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4129047/diff/1003/lily/beam-quanting.cc#oldcode249
lily/beam-quanting.cc:249: scores->clear ();
I have absolutely no knowledge of this code or algorithm, but are you
certain you want to delete this line?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4129047/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[Mike Solomon]

Sounds good...Han-Wen (or whoever), shoot me an e-mail for the scores.  They 
are all scanned from the University of Florida library, so they don't belong to 
me, but I use them for my research, of which nearly 100% is tied to LilyPond in 
some way shape or form.

Cheers,
MS

On Feb 3, 2011, at 10:55 AM, David Kastrup wrote:

> Mike Solomon  writes:
> 
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> I have scanned examples from Boulez's Third Piano Sonata, Elliot
>> Carter's Night Fantasies, Elliot Carter's Sonata, and Stockhausen's
>> Klavierstücke II & IV.  However, I don't want to go to jail for
>> sending out a link to the LilyPond devel list where these scans are
>> posted.  How should I go about sharing it w/ all interested parties &
>> staying w/in the realm of what's legal @ the same time?
> 
> You wait for someone you know to contact you via personal mail for the
> purpose of helping you with your task.  As long as they need the scans
> to work on a task commissioned by you, that should be reasonably within
> the confines of fair use as long as you are in legal possession of the
> requisite originals.
> 
> Of course, this is at best an unqualified opinion and must not be
> confused with binding legal advice.
> 
> -- 
> David Kastrup
> 
> 
> ___
> 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: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[David Kastrup]

Mike Solomon  writes:

> Hey all,
>
> I have scanned examples from Boulez's Third Piano Sonata, Elliot
> Carter's Night Fantasies, Elliot Carter's Sonata, and Stockhausen's
> Klavierstücke II & IV.  However, I don't want to go to jail for
> sending out a link to the LilyPond devel list where these scans are
> posted.  How should I go about sharing it w/ all interested parties &
> staying w/in the realm of what's legal @ the same time?

You wait for someone you know to contact you via personal mail for the
purpose of helping you with your task.  As long as they need the scans
to work on a task commissioned by you, that should be reasonably within
the confines of fair use as long as you are in legal possession of the
requisite originals.

Of course, this is at best an unqualified opinion and must not be
confused with binding legal advice.

-- 
David Kastrup


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[Mike Solomon]

Hey all,

I have scanned examples from Boulez's Third Piano Sonata, Elliot Carter's Night 
Fantasies, Elliot Carter's Sonata, and Stockhausen's Klavierstücke II & IV.  
However, I don't want to go to jail for sending out a link to the LilyPond 
devel list where these scans are posted.  How should I go about sharing it w/ 
all interested parties & staying w/in the realm of what's legal @ the same time?

Cheers,
MS

On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:41 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:

> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Mike Solomon  wrote:
>  
> In the attached example bad.png, I have a difficult time conceiving of how 
> the quant scoring function could anticipate and account for the huge region 
> size that would be necessary to find this collision.  It goes against the 
> "given" above that the beam lies in a reasonable region.
> 
> I have some ideas in this area as well, but can we have a sample of realistic 
> situations of beam collisions first?  I find it hard to believe anybody would 
> actually write that because it is completely unreadable.
> 
> -- 
> Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[Benkő Pál]

>> IIRC, "diatonic" can refer to any church mode.
>>
>> Let me rephrase / alter my initial suggestion: might it be worth
>> having some predefined scales for actually well-defined scales?
>> Like \major or \locrian or the like?  They could go in a new
>> ly/*-init.ly file, or maybe something in scm/.  Something like
>> "define-scales-init.ly" ?
>
> Well, we could, but each scale would be specific to a single
> key.  We could choose to define \major in the key of C and
> expect users to use \transpose to generate scales in other
> keys, but as Keith pointed out that is hardly shorter than
> writing out the desired scale anyway.  And what key would you
> chose for \minor?  Am or Cm?  And to distinguish the several
> minor scales the names would need to be longer still.
>
> The scales of the various "church" modes appear to have several
> variants, apart from being key-specific, although I confess to
> being pretty ignorant here.

I think for these purposes all church modes are equivalent.
the different minor scales are truly different.

> For pentatonic scales there are even more in common use,
> I believe.  Even the five black-key scales are all distinct.

but are equivalent, just as the church modes are equivalent
for diatonic transpositions and mirroring.

(I'm waiting eagerly for these features, no matter whether there
are preinstalled definitions in -init.ly files or not; they are a lot nicer
than my hacks for diatonic mirroring!)

p

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Mike Solomon  wrote:


> In the attached example bad.png, I have a difficult time conceiving of how
> the quant scoring function could anticipate and account for the huge region
> size that would be necessary to find this collision.  It goes against the
> "given" above that the beam lies in a reasonable region.
>

I have some ideas in this area as well, but can we have a sample of
realistic situations of beam collisions first?  I find it hard to believe
anybody would actually write that because it is completely unreadable.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: FW: about compiling LilyPond

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

If you're lucky and there are no big changes to header files,
ccache is your friend.

You can probably reuse config.hh and config.make between bisects,
and probably also mf/out if there are no changes in the font.

HTH
Jan.

James Lowe schreef op do 03-02-2011 om 14:17 [+]:
> 
> From: 章向 [mailto:zhangxy290626...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 03 February 2011 14:06
> To: James Lowe
> Subject: Re: about compiling LilyPond
> 
> I have seen this web page, but I couldn't find what I want. I find that 
> during the make process, it seems to do some testing and occurs some internal 
> errors. I don't konw whether it is necessary, and if I can skip this for 
> saving time.
> 2011/2/3 James Lowe mailto:james.l...@datacore.com>>
> Zhang,
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: 
> lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore.com@gnu.org
>  
> [mailto:lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore.com@gnu.org]
>  On Behalf Of Han-Wen Nienhuys
> Sent: 03 February 2011 12:22
> To: lilypond-devel
> Subject: Fwd: about compiling LilyPond
> 
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: 章向 mailto:zhan...@nlsde.buaa.edu.cn>>
> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:13 AM
> Subject: about compiling LilyPond
> To: hanwenn mailto:hanw...@gmail.com>>
> 
> 
> Dear hanwenn,
> 
> I want to automate debugging with Lilypond by git bisect.The problem is that 
> the process of compiling takes me a long time. It's about
> 16~20 minutes per time.Is it possible to skip some unnecessary processes to 
> make the compiling more quickly? And how to do it?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> ---
> 
> You might want to start here
> 
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/contributor/compiling
> 
> There are some sections that might help you.
> 
> Then you can ask more specific questions (perhaps) to the group.
> 
> James
> 
> ___
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> lilypond-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar®  http://AvatarAcademy.nl  


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

FW: about compiling LilyPond

[James Lowe]

From: 章向碰 [mailto:zhangxy290626...@gmail.com]
Sent: 03 February 2011 14:06
To: James Lowe
Subject: Re: about compiling LilyPond

I have seen this web page, but I couldn't find what I want. I find that during 
the make process, it seems to do some testing and occurs some internal errors. 
I don't konw whether it is necessary, and if I can skip this for saving time.
2011/2/3 James Lowe mailto:james.l...@datacore.com>>
Zhang,

-Original Message-
From: 
lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore.com@gnu.org
 
[mailto:lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore.com@gnu.org]
 On Behalf Of Han-Wen Nienhuys
Sent: 03 February 2011 12:22
To: lilypond-devel
Subject: Fwd: about compiling LilyPond

-- Forwarded message --
From: 章向碰 mailto:zhan...@nlsde.buaa.edu.cn>>
Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:13 AM
Subject: about compiling LilyPond
To: hanwenn mailto:hanw...@gmail.com>>


Dear hanwenn,

I want to automate debugging with Lilypond by git bisect.The problem is that 
the process of compiling takes me a long time. It's about
16~20 minutes per time.Is it possible to skip some unnecessary processes to 
make the compiling more quickly? And how to do it?

Thanks.

---

You might want to start here

http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/contributor/compiling

There are some sections that might help you.

Then you can ask more specific questions (perhaps) to the group.

James

<>___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: PATCHES: 48-hour notice for note spacing and negative frets

[Mike Solomon]

On Feb 2, 2011, at 9:32 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:26 AM, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:The most recent patch set only has a single pass through beam quanting.  Idon't believe it adds significant overhead to a score's compile time,although I'd need someone to do some benchmarking to verify that.http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045Han-Wen: could you summarize again your main objections to this approach?  II think the collisions should be done as part of the scoring, not as aseparate function that happens afterwards.  I also think that anynotion of 'pressure' should follow automatically from the scoring.New patchset at http://codereview.appspot.com/4022045 that makes changes to fit with Han-Wen's new beam-quanting code .It seems to me that the idea behind quanting is "given that we have the beam more or less in an appropriate region and at a good slope, find the best configuration for that beam in said region and around said slope."In the attached example bad.png, I have a difficult time conceiving of how the quant scoring function could anticipate and account for the huge region size that would be necessary to find this collision.  It goes against the "given" above that the beam lies in a reasonable region.The example better.png shows a beam with collision avoiding applied before quanting but with quanting commented out of define-grobs.scm .  Note that the beam is now in a region where quanting can be done.The example best.png adds in the quanting function.Given that pressure needs to be calculated only once for the entire beam, it seems that it should not be called in any of the score_X_quants functions.  I cannot see a reason why this code would be in beam-quanting.cc and something like slope_damping would be in beam.cc .  It seems that collision avoidance, like slope damping and shifting, is a precondition of best beam placement and thus belongs before quanting.Cheers,Mike___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[Trevor Daniels]

Graham Percival wrote Wednesday, February 02, 2011 7:38 PM



IIRC, "diatonic" can refer to any church mode.

Let me rephrase / alter my initial suggestion: might it be worth
having some predefined scales for actually well-defined scales?
Like \major or \locrian or the like?  They could go in a new
ly/*-init.ly file, or maybe something in scm/.  Something like
"define-scales-init.ly" ?


Well, we could, but each scale would be specific to a single
key.  We could choose to define \major in the key of C and
expect users to use \transpose to generate scales in other
keys, but as Keith pointed out that is hardly shorter than
writing out the desired scale anyway.  And what key would you
chose for \minor?  Am or Cm?  And to distinguish the several
minor scales the names would need to be longer still.

The scales of the various "church" modes appear to have several
variants, apart from being key-specific, although I confess to
being pretty ignorant here.

For pentatonic scales there are even more in common use,
I believe.  Even the five black-key scales are all distinct.


For octatonic, we could have octatonicA and octatonicB, or
something like that... IIRC there's only two types of those
scales.  (or maybe we should avoid using A and B, and instead call
them "octatonicBeginFull" and "octatonicBeginHalf" ? )


These are modes within any one of the three distinct diminished
octotonic scales.  But in total there are 42 other 
non-enharmonically

equivalent octotonic scales.

So I wonder if this is worth the trouble.  AFAIK there is no
universal naming convention to distinguish them all.  As
Bernard says, he is engaged in systematically naming all the
seven-note scales, and even this is with limitations.

Trevor



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

RE: about compiling LilyPond

[James Lowe]

Zhang,

-Original Message-
From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org 
[mailto:lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] On Behalf Of 
Han-Wen Nienhuys
Sent: 03 February 2011 12:22
To: lilypond-devel
Subject: Fwd: about compiling LilyPond

-- Forwarded message --
From: 章向昱 
Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:13 AM
Subject: about compiling LilyPond
To: hanwenn 


Dear hanwenn,

I want to automate debugging with Lilypond by git bisect.The problem is that 
the process of compiling takes me a long time. It's about
16~20 minutes per time.Is it possible to skip some unnecessary processes to 
make the compiling more quickly? And how to do it?

Thanks.

---

You might want to start here

http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/contributor/compiling

There are some sections that might help you.

Then you can ask more specific questions (perhaps) to the group.

James
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Fwd: about compiling LilyPond

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

-- Forwarded message --
From: 章向昱 
Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:13 AM
Subject: about compiling LilyPond
To: hanwenn 


Dear hanwenn,

I want to automate debugging with Lilypond by git bisect.The problem
is that the process of compiling takes me a long time. It's about
16~20 minutes per time.Is it possible to skip some unnecessary
processes to make the compiling more quickly? And how to do it?

Thanks.



-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[tdanielsmusic]

Thanks James


http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode828
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:828: Lilypond provides functions
for applying these transformations.
On 2011/02/03 10:14:47, pkx166h wrote:


Do we need this last sentence 'Lilypond provides..'.


No.  Deleted.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode862
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:862: @end lilypond
On 2011/02/03 10:14:47, pkx166h wrote:


do we need the '\score' and/or '\new Staff' between the
@Lilypond and @end Lilypond constructs?


Yes.  It's the same with \transpose.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode868
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:868: motif = \relative c' { ees8
des ges,4  }
On 2011/02/03 10:14:47, pkx166h wrote:


need a space before the closing '}'

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode912
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:912: opposite direction:
On 2011/02/03 10:14:47, pkx166h wrote:


I had to read this a few times for to make sense to me,
so how about instead:

Done

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode953
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:953: The combined operation of
inversion and retrograde produce the
On 2011/02/03 10:14:47, pkx166h wrote:


The combined operation of @code{inversion} and
@code{retrograde} ...

No.  These are not code items.  If anything they might be
@notation{}, but we don't do that for every musical term
every time it is used, only the first time in a section.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[Trevor Daniels]

Keith wrote Thursday, February 03, 2011 7:22 AM


http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/ly/music-functions-init.ly#newcode465
ly/music-functions-init.ly:465: modalInversion =
Since it is an operator, should it be a verb, modalInvert ?
The distinction between \transpose and \transposition is so 
tricky, that

I think it worth being careful in similar items.
\modalTranspose is the right name because it is an operation as is
\transpose


Inadvertently I omitted to respond to this on Rietveld.

While I take your point, \modalInvert doesn't quite sound
right to me, and that makes it harder to remember.  The
modifier should really be adverbial, \modallyInvert, if
a verbal form is to be used.  That's a bit longer though.
And if we make that change I guess we should use
\modallyTranspose too, which is even longer.

So I'm undecided and made no change at this time.  Let's
see if any other opinion is expressed first.

Trevor




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[tdanielsmusic]

Thanks Keith


http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode867
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:867: pentatonicScale = \relative c'
{ ges aes bes des ees ges }
On 2011/02/03 07:22:36, Keith wrote:


Oops, you want only the first /five/ pitches.

Done


If you like, you could simplify by basing the scale on f
  \relative c' { f g a c d }
\motif = \relative c' { d8 c f,4   }


This was originally called blackNoteScale.  I think I prefer
to leave it as the black notes so the example retains its familiarity.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode943
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:943: motif = \relative c' { c8.
ees16 fis8. a16 b8. gis16 f8. d16 }
On 2011/02/03 07:22:36, Keith wrote:


Optionally, you could throw in a slur

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode967
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:967:
On 2011/02/03 07:22:36, Keith wrote:


Optionally, a note that ties break, even though slurs
work fine.  (Internally, ties are only attached to one
note)
@knownissues
Manual ties inside @code{\retrograde} will be broken and
generate warnings.  @ref{Automatic note splitting} can be
enabled to generate some ties automatically.

Done

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[pkx166h]

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode828
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:828: Lilypond provides functions
for applying these transformations.
Do we need this last sentence 'Lilypond provides..'.

If so 'LilyPond' not 'Lilypond'.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode862
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:862: @end lilypond
This maybe showing my ignorance here, but do we need the '\score' and/or
'\new Staff' between the @Lilypond and @end Lilypond constructs? - for
the sake of simplifying the examples.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode868
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:868: motif = \relative c' { ees8
des ges,4  }
Minor nitpick. need a space before the closing '}'

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode912
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:912: opposite direction:
I had to read this a few times for to make sense to me, so how about
instead:

The notes of @var{motif} are placed the same number of scale degrees
from the @var{pivot} note within the @var{scale}, but in the opposite
direction.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/diff/5002/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode953
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:953: The combined operation of
inversion and retrograde produce the
The combined operation of @code{inversion} and @code{retrograde} ...

http://codereview.appspot.com/4126042/

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Add Modal transformations (issue4126042)

[Bernard Hurley]

On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 07:38:45PM +, Graham Percival wrote:
> 
> Let me rephrase / alter my initial suggestion: might it be worth
> having some predefined scales for actually well-defined scales?
> Like \major or \locrian or the like?  They could go in a new
> ly/*-init.ly file, or maybe something in scm/.  Something like
> "define-scales-init.ly" ?
> 

We could add things like the Messiaen modes.

It would also be nice if we could define our own scales as in:

\defineScale fred = {c d es fis g as bes c}

One of my favourite scales. I don't know if this syntax would be best but I 
think it is clear what I mean.

Would it be possible to support scales that repeat at intervals other than an 
octave? As, for instance, Hauer and Bartok sometimes used.


> For octatonic, we could have octatonicA and octatonicB, or
> something like that... IIRC there's only two types of those
> scales.  (or maybe we should avoid using A and B, and instead call
> them "octatonicBeginFull" and "octatonicBeginHalf" ? )
> 

Personally I don't like things like "A", "B", "One", "Two" unless they are part 
of an established name.

  /Bernard

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel