Re: Issue 3798: Bad beam exceptions in bagpipe.ly (issue 50790043)

2014-01-11 Thread dak 

Reviewers: carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com,

Message:
On 2014/01/12 03:59:20, Carl wrote:

Do you want me to make a patch for the old way that can be applied to

2.18.1?

I think I'll be able to insert the necessary 4 characters myself...  But
thanks for the offer.

Description:
Issue 3798: Bad beam exceptions in bagpipe.ly

A backport to 2.18.1 seems desirable, but it would have to use the
"old" way of specifying beaming exceptions.

Please review this at https://codereview.appspot.com/50790043/

Affected files (+4, -3 lines):
  M ly/bagpipe.ly


Index: ly/bagpipe.ly
diff --git a/ly/bagpipe.ly b/ly/bagpipe.ly
index  
9252f723b5b9e4b5cab1afa4ee00aed21aa39013..c1901e460c7e51f8475c581fa56c7ec27b48cd4b  
100644

--- a/ly/bagpipe.ly
+++ b/ly/bagpipe.ly
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
   $Id: bagpipe.ly,v 1.12 2006/03/16 14:39:46 hanwen Exp $
 %}

-\version "2.17.30"
+\version "2.19.0"

 % Notes of the scale of the Great Highland Bagpipe. Extra high notes for  
bombarde.

 % Flat notes used mainly in some modern music.
@@ -71,8 +71,9 @@ quarterBeaming = {
   \set Staff.beamExceptions = #'()
 }
 halfBeaming = {
-  \set Staff.beamExceptions = #'((end . (((1 . 8) . (4 4))
- ((1 . 12) . (3 3)
+  \set Staff.beamExceptions =
+  \beamExceptions { 8[ 8 8 8] |
+   \tuplet 3/2 { 8[ 8 8] 8[ 8 8] 8[ 8 8] 8[ 8 8] } }
 }

 % Reels are in allabreve time with half note beaming.



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

PATCHES: Countdown for January 15th - 06:00 GMT

2014-01-11 Thread James 

Hello

The following patches have been at 'please push' for the last 3 
countdowns (i.e. over 9 days), and I am not seeing anything obvious that 
leads me to believe that their is 'Needs Work' on them. I am seeing 
recent emails from them on the lists and so assume they would also be 
getting the tracker emails too.


3761 
 
	Enhancement 	Keith Ohara 	push 	LeftEdge no longer takes up space
3753 
 
	Enhancement 	Carl Peterson 	push 	Patch: Cleanup of ugly MI and SOL 
shaped noteheads
3764 
 
	Enhancement 	Janek Warchol 	push 	Patch: Swap 'polite' and 'l2r' 
variable definitions



If the authors don't want to push, can they change the label to 
something more appropriate? Thank you.


As for the rest:

1272 
 
	Build 	Federico Bruni 	push 	remove old /web/ 	
3789 
 
	Enhancement 	Urs Liska 	push 	Patch: Web:Background: Reword 
introductory paragraph 	
3788 
 
	Enhancement 	Urs Liska 	push 	Patch: Web:Reviews: Add title box 	
3787 
 
	Enhancement 	Urs Liska 	push 	Patch: Web:Productions: Add title box 	
3786 
 
	Enhancement 	Urs Liska 	push 	Patch: Web:Examples: Enclose in box 	
3785 
 
	Enhancement 	Urs Liska 	push 	Patch: Web:Introduction: Rename "Our 
Goal" box 	
3779 
 
	Enhancement 	James Lowe 	push 	Patch: Web: Replaced Debian Logo w/the 
'open use' version 	
3781 
 
	Enhancement 	James Lowe 	push 	Patch: Doc: NR Tidy up of Midi 3.5.x 
sections 	
3780 
 
	Enhancement 	David Kastrup 	push 	Patch: Allow use of Scheme 
expressions as chord constituents   Backport_2_18_1 	
3782

fixing German's Wikipedia entry of LilyPond

2014-01-11 Thread Werner LEMBERG 

Folks,


the German Wikipedia entry of LilyPond at

  https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/LilyPond

shows a few bars of a Stockhausen piano piece.  Unfortunately, it's of
bad quality: it contains input errors (cf. the plain text `pp'), the
typesetting of the score itself, and its conversion to SVG (resp. the
follow-up conversion to PNG).  This is not an advertisement for
Lilypond at all IMHO...

The input file (for version 2.12.2!) can be found here

  
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Klavierst%C3%BCcke_(Stockhausen)_Nr2-Klavierst%C3%BCck2-Anfang.svg

and a quick search for a scan of the original print gives me

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE2cMxY91rU

I'm quite sure that we can do that *much* better!

Any volunteer?  Unfortunately, I don't have time to do that by myself.


Werner

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

Re: 3.0?

2014-01-11 Thread Carl Peterson 
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 11:50 PM, Paul Morris  wrote:

> Carl Sorensen-3 wrote
> > I can't speak for Carl P's work.  For me, effective LP input files
> require
> > structure (variables, contexts) that MusicXML knows nothing of. And it's
> > generally easier to create them than to fix them on import.
>
> I see what you mean.  Unfortunately it makes it harder to use other tools
> that are optimized for composing with LilyPond...  Seems like capturing
> just
> the musical content from a MusicXML file and then pasting it into a LP
> template or file that has the LP structure should be easier than re-typing
> it.  But I defer to those with more experience in this area, as I've only
> done musicXML import a few times.
>
> Urs Liska wrote
> > https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/345
>
> I'm not sure about this.  Seems like you could get basically the same
> workflow by using a second file as a sketchpad without having to introduce
> a
> new UI component.  See my comment at the link above for more of my thoughts
> on this.
>
> -Paul
>
>
Allow me to extend my use case a bit further. My own work is similar to
what I understand of Carl S's work. I have a file where I define each of my
SATB parts, each lyrical verse, and calls a template file that takes the
parts and creates the two staves for the music, with both a part-combined
voice for display purposes and separated voices for MIDI and lyric purposes
(the separated notes are hidden and non-colliding, etc., in the layout). I
have a second file where I include this "master" file and create either the
paper hymnal layout or slides for projection (depending upon which layout
template I call).

I've done the two file workflow before, typically when I've created the
four parts using a basic SATB template, then copied and pasted into the
variables of my own template. That said, I am also trying to think about
features which would make this more productive for someone who *isn't*
inclined to work multiple files, variables, etc.

What I would *ultimately* like is the ability for someone to visually write
each part on separate staves (or using two staves with two voices each),
then those parts are translated into the template without any direct code
manipulation. The visual interface would be like the single-line view in
Finale (where it's not trying to deal with line lengths/spacing, etc.).
This is basically what I do in MuseScore or Finale Notepad from the
compositional side, but I'm trying to find the most efficient workflow to
go from that to my template. I don't know if it's practical, possible, or
what. I don't know whether this would be a Frescobaldi thing or a Denemo
thing. Since Denemo is already a GUI experience, it may be the better place
to try to get this kind of functionality.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 3.0?

2014-01-11 Thread Paul Morris 
Carl Sorensen-3 wrote
> I can't speak for Carl P's work.  For me, effective LP input files require
> structure (variables, contexts) that MusicXML knows nothing of. And it's
> generally easier to create them than to fix them on import.

I see what you mean.  Unfortunately it makes it harder to use other tools
that are optimized for composing with LilyPond...  Seems like capturing just
the musical content from a MusicXML file and then pasting it into a LP
template or file that has the LP structure should be easier than re-typing
it.  But I defer to those with more experience in this area, as I've only
done musicXML import a few times.  



David Kastrup wrote
>>> One very nice integrated experience is offered by preview-latex
>>> ;.
> 
> I wish we'd have something like that for the LilyPond manuals.

This does look good.  It would be really nice to have something like this
for the manuals.



Urs Liska wrote
> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/345

I'm not sure about this.  Seems like you could get basically the same
workflow by using a second file as a sketchpad without having to introduce a
new UI component.  See my comment at the link above for more of my thoughts
on this.

-Paul




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/3-0-tp157489p157682.html
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Issue 3798: Bad beam exceptions in bagpipe.ly (issue 50790043)

2014-01-11 Thread Carl . D . Sorensen 

Do you want me to make a patch for the old way that can be applied to
2.18.1?



https://codereview.appspot.com/50790043/

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

Re: 3.0?

2014-01-11 Thread Urs Liska 
Am Donnerstag, den 09.01.2014, 10:13 -0500 schrieb Carl Peterson:
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 6:20 AM, David Kastrup  wrote:
> > Another problem is that LilyPond has a usage philosophy and workflow
> > that strongly penalizes manual tweaks.  Graphically/manually oriented
> > workflows detract from the importance of getting good default
> > typesetting.
> 
> I don't know that I agree with this, entirely. I use MuseScore,
> Scorio, and Finale Notepad (depending on where I am and how I feel)
> for compositional work because they provide ease of note entry in the
> composing process and the ability to have instant aural feedback on
> what I've written (particularly if I'm not at my keyboard to play what
> I've written). Once I have the draft of the music written, I will
> manually retype the music into my LilyPond template because of the
> "good default typesetting" it provides. Now, consider an IDE/GUI setup
> (perhaps an extension of Frescobaldi) that would allow me to define a
> variable for a voice, then pop up a musical staff to enter and play
> back the notes for that variable without dealing with the whole
> compilation process. No manual tweaking of notes, just the entry of
> the entry and playback of the notes, and I don't have to insert the
> notes into the music itself yet or deal with whatever may or may not
> be wrong with the rest of my file. I realize that this would not
> necessarily work for all use cases, but I think for a large number of
> them, this could be beneficial. It would reduce a number of my
> transcription errors without me having to compile, scan for errors,
> potentially figure out where the errors are (depending on workflow),
> correct, recompile, etc.
> 
> Carl

https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/345



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

Re: 3.0?

2014-01-11 Thread David Kastrup 
Janek Warchoł  writes:

> 2014/1/11 David Kastrup :
>> One very nice integrated experience is offered by preview-latex
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/preview-latex>.
>
>
> Indeed, this is very nice.  Although i haven't used it, i know i would
> enjoy it :)

Well, actually it's a lot better than you'd guess from the screenshots:
the proof-of-concept took about two weeks, and the screen shots would
not have been much different then (apart from the descenders being
wrong).

There's been years of development going into it afterwards.  It's
technology that does not get in the way, is fast and reliable, and
integrates with personal workflows seamlessly.

I wish we'd have something like that for the LilyPond manuals.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: 3.0?

2014-01-11 Thread Janek Warchoł 
2014/1/11 David Kastrup :
> One very nice integrated experience is offered by preview-latex
> http://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/preview-latex>.


Indeed, this is very nice.  Although i haven't used it, i know i would
enjoy it :)

j

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

Re: Issue 3796: Doc: Bump version number (issue 50530044)

2014-01-11 Thread tdanielsmusic 

Reviewers: dak,

Message:
Changed to 2.18.0 and pushed to staging as
220298a9a1dcd1c318a38d79aa3a5ea694a17270
Closing ...

Description:
Issue 3796: Doc: Bump version number

  The version number of this file should have been increased
  to 2.19.0 when patch 22ea3eb6b78a50784ae02c3f29060e1c093262a4
  for Issue 3720 was applied to prevent inappropriate conversions
  being made by convert-ly.

Please review this at https://codereview.appspot.com/50530044/

Affected files (+1, -1 lines):
  M Documentation/learning/templates.itely


Index: Documentation/learning/templates.itely
diff --git a/Documentation/learning/templates.itely  
b/Documentation/learning/templates.itely
index  
de1a3d68b740fed74827cc880c4004b38f141139..d91babbdb8a1dd0b05a9ce9b7a06a8a76bef9d00  
100644

--- a/Documentation/learning/templates.itely
+++ b/Documentation/learning/templates.itely
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
 Guide, node Updating translation committishes..
 @end ignore

-@c \version "2.16.0"
+@c \version "2.19.0"

 @node Templates
 @appendix Templates



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

Re: How many slurs in LilyPond need adjusting? (was: New, more powerful version of \shape!)

2014-01-11 Thread Kieren MacMillan 
Hi Janek,

Thank you for all your continuing and wonderful work on curves in particular, 
and Lilypond in general!

1. Would you consider putting all your tweaks and shortcuts in a file — on 
GitHub, maybe? ;) — so that we can all benefit from your expertise?

2. When might HDLCCO (the "highly-desirable Lilypond curve-code overhaul”) 
happen?

Thanks,
Kieren.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 3.0?

2014-01-11 Thread Carl Sorensen 


On Jan 10, 2014, at 11:41 PM, "Paul Morris"  wrote:

>   Seems like getting just the notes (not layout) out of an
> imported musicXML file should be an easy and straightforward thing, but I
> guess not?
> 
I can't speak for Carl P's work.  For me, effective LP input files require 
structure (variables, contexts) that MusicXML knows nothing of. And it's 
generally easier to create them than to fix them on import.

Carl S.



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

Issue 3796: Doc: Bump version number (issue 50530044)

2014-01-11 Thread dak 


https://codereview.appspot.com/50530044/diff/1/Documentation/learning/templates.itely
File Documentation/learning/templates.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/50530044/diff/1/Documentation/learning/templates.itely#newcode11
Documentation/learning/templates.itely:11: @c \version "2.19.0"
I might want to cherry-pick those changes into translations/stable, so
better use 2.18.0 here.  Other than that, I see no reason not to push
straight to staging.

https://codereview.appspot.com/50530044/

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

Re: 3.0?

2014-01-11 Thread David Kastrup 
Janek Warchoł  writes:

> 2014/1/10 Urs Liska :
>>
>> Well,
>> compiling a few measures of a single staff feels nearly instantaneous, and
>> when you're editing an orchestral score this makes a huge difference.
>>
>> Generally I'd think it would be a good idea to have such an interface in
>> Frescobaldi.
>
>
> I know that this is not exactly what we're talking about, but i
> believe that things like this (previewing music, partially compiled
> scores, instant feedback sacrificing some quality) are exactly what
> Denemo is for.  I honestly believe that Denemo would be invaluable to
> LilyPond if only it could open all Lily files, not just those created
> by itself.  (and if the UI&UX kinks would be ironed out).

One very nice integrated experience is offered by preview-latex
http://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/preview-latex>.  preview-latex
has no clue about the documents itself and does not actually "import"
them.  It does not parse them and does not touch the input or create a
representation of it.  There are several things it does for fast update
of single items (the first run is per-document, though):

a) it dumps a preloaded format including all "document classes" and
"document styles", namely everything before "\begin{document}".  This
operation is optional.

b) When rerunning material in a single item, it cuts it out, precedes it
with what it considers the "document preamble", follows it by what it
considers the "document ending", and runs that through.  That means,
obviously, that any macros you refer to have to be defined in the
"document preamble" or stuff won't work.  It's quite uncommon to arrange
a LaTeX source using actual macros, so that usually works pretty well.

When wanting to do that approach using LilyPond, the "preloaded format"
thing can be accommodated quite better than with TeX (which is taken
as-is as a binary): we can just have a LilyPond process waiting for
action, and use the session mechanism for providing a reasonably
prepared situation without needing a new process each time.

The problem is that LilyPond sources more often than not _are_ arranged
with macro definitions, so we need to get those dependencies right.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: 3.0?

2014-01-11 Thread Janek Warchoł 
2014/1/10 Urs Liska :
>
> Well,
> compiling a few measures of a single staff feels nearly instantaneous, and
> when you're editing an orchestral score this makes a huge difference.
>
> Generally I'd think it would be a good idea to have such an interface in
> Frescobaldi.


I know that this is not exactly what we're talking about, but i
believe that things like this (previewing music, partially compiled
scores, instant feedback sacrificing some quality) are exactly what
Denemo is for.  I honestly believe that Denemo would be invaluable to
LilyPond if only it could open all Lily files, not just those created
by itself.  (and if the UI&UX kinks would be ironed out).

best,
Janek

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

How many slurs in LilyPond need adjusting? (was: New, more powerful version of \shape!)

2014-01-11 Thread Janek Warchoł 
Hi,

Some time ago we were discussing what percentage of slurs in LilyPond
need shaping:

2013/10/18 David Kastrup :
> Janek Warchoł  writes:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> \shape is an awesome function, indispensable for creating
>> publication-quality slurs. However, after using it 1107 times in a
>> recent project (this number is not a joke!),
>
> Well, it should be.  It means that our slur shaping and quanting is
> apparently not doing its job.


2013/10/18 Janek Warchoł :
>
> 2013/10/18 Urs Liska :
>> Janek, can you come up with a reliable way of determining
>> the total number of slurs, ties etc in the project?
>> It would be interesting to get a percentage of curves
>> that needed manual treatmend.
>
> Indeed, a very interesting statictic.
>
> I'm going to make a detailed analysis of the project and publish the
> statistics on the LilyPond Blog in a few days.


I apologize for the huge delay... The post was finally published on
the blog.  I invite everyone to discuss the results i got in comments:
http://lilypondblog.org/2014/01/engraving-statistics-slurs-and-ties/

best,
Janek

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