Re: [frogs] Re: convert-ly keySignautre issue nearly solved
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Mats Bengtsson wrote: > Quoting "Carl D. Sorensen" : > >> >> >> >> On 5/12/09 11:14 PM, "Andrew Hawryluk" wrote: >> >>> I think I have figured out issue 708: >>> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=708 >>> Before I submit a patch, how do I decide which LP version this goes >>> under for convert-ly? >> >> You will want to see where the keySignature syntax changed. > > No it's not that simple. The solution proposed in the bug tracker is really > only relevant for scores older than version 2.0 (I haven't checked exactly > which 1.9 version the change happened), when the internal representation for > accidentals changed to be able to handle quarter tones. In version 1.8 and > earlier, the alteration +1 meant sharp and -1 meant flat, whereas from > version 2.0 to version 2.10, +1 meant semi-sharp, +2 meant sharp, -2 meant > flat and so on. ... > However, in version 2.11.6, the next change happened to the internal > representation of alterations. From then, a sharp is represented by +1/2, a > flat by -1/2 and so on. For all the people who had already used the macros > SHARP, FLAT, DOUBLE-FLAT and so on, this didn't cause any problems, but for > those who had kept the numeric representation, you all of a sudden end up > with a "missing glyph" error if you for example specify +2 or -2. Excellent. Thanks for the helpful background! I can piece together the rest of the info I need from convertrules.py. Andrew ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: [frogs] Re: convert-ly keySignautre issue nearly solved
Quoting "Carl D. Sorensen" : On 5/12/09 11:14 PM, "Andrew Hawryluk" wrote: I think I have figured out issue 708: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=708 Before I submit a patch, how do I decide which LP version this goes under for convert-ly? You will want to see where the keySignature syntax changed. No it's not that simple. The solution proposed in the bug tracker is really only relevant for scores older than version 2.0 (I haven't checked exactly which 1.9 version the change happened), when the internal representation for accidentals changed to be able to handle quarter tones. In version 1.8 and earlier, the alteration +1 meant sharp and -1 meant flat, whereas from version 2.0 to version 2.10, +1 meant semi-sharp, +2 meant sharp, -2 meant flat and so on. If you check the example called key-signature-scordatura.ly in the Regression t Tests documents of version 1.8 and 2.0, you can easily notice the change, since the input file stayed the same but the output changed. (If you check the documentation of the Key engraver in the program references, you will notice that the documentation wasn't updated until version 2.2). However, as you can see from the above mentioned regression test example, LilyPond still produced reasonable output for input of the type mentioned in the bug report. However, in version 2.11.6, the next change happened to the internal representation of alterations. From then, a sharp is represented by +1/2, a flat by -1/2 and so on. For all the people who had already used the macros SHARP, FLAT, DOUBLE-FLAT and so on, this didn't cause any problems, but for those who had kept the numeric representation, you all of a sudden end up with a "missing glyph" error if you for example specify +2 or -2. To conclude, if you want to do a convert-ly rule that converts +1 -> SHARP +2 -> DOUBLE-SHARP ... that it should apply to some 1.9 version. On the other hand, if you do a convert-ly rule that converts +2 -> SHARP +1 -> SEMI-SHARP +4 -> DOUBPLE-SHARP ... then it should apply to version 2.11.6. I would actually propose that you take the effort to include both these conversion rules. /Mats ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: convert-ly keySignautre issue nearly solved
On 5/12/09 11:14 PM, "Andrew Hawryluk" wrote: > I think I have figured out issue 708: > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=708 > Before I submit a patch, how do I decide which LP version this goes > under for convert-ly? You will want to see where the keySignature syntax changed. You may be able to find this in convert-ly by looking for rules. You may be able to find this in NEWS (but you'll need to check older versions). You may be able to find this by searching the repository. I'd recommend you start with NEWS. Note: You have a clue that it comes after 2.8.4, because that's the original snippet that is not converted properly. HTH, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
convert-ly keySignautre issue nearly solved
I think I have figured out issue 708: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=708 Before I submit a patch, how do I decide which LP version this goes under for convert-ly? Andrew ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
