Re: lilypond GUI editors
MuseScore does not require lilypond but export a file that should be compatible with lilypond 2.12 via File-Save Lasconic http://musescore.org Martin Tarenskeen wrote: Frescobaldi-1.1.1 requires, correct me if I am wrong, Lilypond 2.13 But Canorus needs Lilypond 2.12. It displays the wrong fonts (clefs, timesignatures) when I try to use 2.13. Why is life so complicated ... -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/lilypond-GUI-editors-tp28764971p28779821.html Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
lilypond GUI editors
Hi, Playing around with the latest versions of Lilypond, Frescobaldi, and Canorus I noticed that: Frescobaldi-1.1.1 requires, correct me if I am wrong, Lilypond 2.13 But Canorus needs Lilypond 2.12. It displays the wrong fonts (clefs, timesignatures) when I try to use 2.13. Why is life so complicated ... -- Martin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
Op donderdag 03-06-2010 om 11:02 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Martin Tarenskeen: Why is life so complicated ... Would life be fun if everything always worked? -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyOfSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.nl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
Op donderdag 03 juni 2010 schreef Martin: Frescobaldi-1.1.1 requires, correct me if I am wrong, Lilypond 2.13 Just to build the icons, because of the new halfopen and snappizzicato articulations. If you download 1.1.1 and just run inside the frescobaldi-1.1.1 directory: cmake . make sudo make install It wil install without requiring lilypond, in /usr/local/. [ If you really do want to rebuild the icons for some reason, or when you want to install a SVN checkout of Frescobaldi, you can specify the LilyPond executable to use with something like: cmake -DLILYPOND_EXECUTABLE=/home/martin/lilypond-2.13.20/bin/lilypond . make sudo make install This way you can use any locally installed LilyPond (from the binaries) to build the icons of Frescobaldi. ] best regards, Wilbert Berendsen -- Frescobaldi, LilyPond editor for KDE: http://www.frescobaldi.org/ Nederlands LilyPond forum: http://www.lilypondforum.nl/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
On Jun 3, 2010, at 5:38, Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Op donderdag 03-06-2010 om 11:02 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Martin Tarenskeen: Why is life so complicated ... Would life be fun if everything always worked? No, but it would surely be more productive. David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
David Santamauro wrote: On Jun 3, 2010, at 5:38, Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Op donderdag 03-06-2010 om 11:02 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Martin Tarenskeen: Why is life so complicated ... Would life be fun if everything always worked? No, but it would surely be more productive. I'd be out of a job. James ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
James Lowe james.l...@datacore.com writes: David Santamauro wrote: On Jun 3, 2010, at 5:38, Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Op donderdag 03-06-2010 om 11:02 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Martin Tarenskeen: Why is life so complicated ... Would life be fun if everything always worked? No, but it would surely be more productive. I'd be out of a job. And you would not need one. Why is everybody so keen on being able to do something he would rather not do out of his own volition? The whole point of machines is to not have to work. It's time our structures cope with that. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
Hi David, And you would not need one. Why is everybody so keen on being able to do something he would rather not do out of his own volition? What if one's job is something one *would* do of one's one volition? The whole point of machines is to not have to work. It's time our structures cope with that. If they invented a computer that could compose music that I liked as much or more than the stuff I compose myself, I'd be very sad: I personally *want* to work as a composer, love my job, and would continue to do it even if I had no need to. Just saying. ;) Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
David Kastrup wrote: James Lowe james.l...@datacore.com writes: David Santamauro wrote: On Jun 3, 2010, at 5:38, Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Op donderdag 03-06-2010 om 11:02 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Martin Tarenskeen: Why is life so complicated ... Would life be fun if everything always worked? No, but it would surely be more productive. I'd be out of a job. And you would not need one. Then what would I do instead? A different job. Big deal. Why is everybody so keen on being able to do something he would rather not do out of his own volition? You're assuming that I am not doing this job out of my own volition. I enjoy solving life's problems and if I can help someone solve their problems too then not only am I doing something I like, but helping a third party so that he or she is now happy. So I win twice. The whole point of machines is to not have to work. It's time our structures cope with that. The whole point of 'machines' is NOT to not have to work. The whole point of machines is to make certain tasks easier to do or to do away with having to worry about things that can be automated, which itself causes life-complications - the word 'Luddites' springs to mind here. We're problem solvers by nature, we thrive on Life's complications even if we think we don't. James ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
Message: 3 Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 08:07:59 -0400 From: Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca Subject: Re: lilypond GUI editors To: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Message-ID: blu0-smtp839942994c70ba2fa382c594...@phx.gbl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi David, And you would not need one. Why is everybody so keen on being able to do something he would rather not do out of his own volition? What if one's job is something one *would* do of one's one volition? The whole point of machines is to not have to work. It's time our structures cope with that. If they invented a computer that could compose music that I liked as much or more than the stuff I compose myself, I'd be very sad: I personally *want* to work as a composer, love my job, and would continue to do it even if I had no need to. Just saying. ;) Kieren. Hi Kieren, I think there would be some Xenophobia in your sadness. Well, I don't know that for sure: do you currently get sad when you hear a piece of music that you like better than something similar that you wrote yourself? Also, I don't think such a thing will happen any time soon. Most of the computer-generated music I've heard sounds like music created for the sole purpose of confusing people who know nothing about music into thinking they're hearing the same patterns as normal music. Then again, the boy Mozart knew how to fake it in the development section when the sight-reading test got too hard, so maybe charlatanism is just Step 1 of musical myth-building. -Jonathan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond GUI editors
Hi Jonathan, do you currently get sad when you hear a piece of music that you like better than something similar that you wrote yourself? Nope: I get inspired! But then again, that happens so seldom... ;) I don't think such a thing will happen any time soon. Me neither: we can't even get *humans* to consistently write good music, so how could we possibly program a computer to do so? Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 15:53, Bertalan Fodor wrote: Certainly not. Actually the java code is compiled to machine code at runtime. This is slower than precompiling, but the compiled code can run faster than its precompiled counterpart, because the runtime machine will have information about how often a certain part of the code is called, and those calls can be made inline. Running inline code is much faster than procedure calls. OK. Did you actually do benchmarking or similar? IIRC, the Java parts of openoffice are compiled to native code in Ubuntu's packages, for performance reasons, so it's not obvious what's best. I guess that memory consumption and startup time of most programs can decrease pretty much if they are compiled to native code. Also, IIRC there are options in gcc to optimise using profiling information; I don't know about gcj though. And gcc -O2 makes fair guesses on what to inline and not. -- Erik ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bertalan Fodor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Certainly not. Actually the java code is compiled to machine code at runtime. This is slower than precompiling, but the compiled code can run faster than its precompiled counterpart, because the runtime machine will have information about how often a certain part of the code is called, and those calls can be made inline. Running inline code is much faster than procedure calls. Bert Java code is actually a form of p-code (p standing for pseudo). Pseudo-code engines CAN be blindingly fast. There's a lot of history behind pseudo-code - like UCSD pascal for example, or the example dear to me, the Pick system. At least one system I ran implemented a lot of the Pick instruction code set in microcode, and indeed, I understand that is the way the transputer works. Any system with access to the first stage of a processor's pipeline and the ability to redefine it (ie any decent modern processor - don't know if that definition includes x86 :-) should be able to run p-code at the same sort of speed as native code. Cheers, Wol Erik Sandberg írta: On Saturday 09 December 2006 10:27, Bertalan Fodor wrote: Well, what is extremely important: development time is so little in Java and with JEdit (compared to any alternatives), that I won't change this platform. The price is that it will remain slow if you don't have much memory in the machine. I'm not a java expert, but wouldn't it get a lot faster if you compiled everything to native machine code (using gcj, for instance)? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: lilypond and editors
It is true that Java is, by default, a p-code style language. However, what Bertalan Fodor was referring to is what's called the Just in Time compiler. The JIT must not be confused with Java's command line compiler. The command line compiler (or those built into IDEs) convert Java text source code into Java byte code (or p-code, if you like). The JIT is actually part of the runtime environment which, as the p-code is accessed, converts the p-code to native machine code. As you might imagine, this is quite a complicated task. So much so that Sun provides two different JITs, one tuned for client access (UIs and such) which converts p-code to native code almost immediately and one tuned for longer running servers, which takes a more analytical approach, making far better choices on machine code conversion based on usage patterns. Keep in mind to that in-lining is only one of a large variety of optimizations the JIT employs. Based on current benchmarks, Java software runs as fast or significantly faster than even hand-written C code. Even in Java 6 (just released) there are some very noticeable speed improvements. All the documentation about Java being slow is either very old (still touted about by anti-Java-ers) or the result of very poor application design and implementation (even the JIT can't overcome a bad programmer; the most typical issue being that the person using Java objects still writes their code very procedure-oriented, without properly switching to the object oriented paradigm). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Anthony W. Youngman Sent: Wed 12/13/2006 5:23 AM To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: lilypond and editors In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bertalan Fodor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Certainly not. Actually the java code is compiled to machine code at runtime. This is slower than precompiling, but the compiled code can run faster than its precompiled counterpart, because the runtime machine will have information about how often a certain part of the code is called, and those calls can be made inline. Running inline code is much faster than procedure calls. Bert Java code is actually a form of p-code (p standing for pseudo). Pseudo-code engines CAN be blindingly fast. There's a lot of history behind pseudo-code - like UCSD pascal for example, or the example dear to me, the Pick system. At least one system I ran implemented a lot of the Pick instruction code set in microcode, and indeed, I understand that is the way the transputer works. Any system with access to the first stage of a processor's pipeline and the ability to redefine it (ie any decent modern processor - don't know if that definition includes x86 :-) should be able to run p-code at the same sort of speed as native code. Cheers, Wol Erik Sandberg írta: On Saturday 09 December 2006 10:27, Bertalan Fodor wrote: Well, what is extremely important: development time is so little in Java and with JEdit (compared to any alternatives), that I won't change this platform. The price is that it will remain slow if you don't have much memory in the machine. I'm not a java expert, but wouldn't it get a lot faster if you compiled everything to native machine code (using gcj, for instance)? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user 2006-12-13, 05:26:57 The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may be privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your computer. 2006-12-13, 08:25:13 The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may be privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your computer.___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: lilypond and editors
Kress, Stephen-2 wrote: It is true that Java is, by default, a p-code style language. However, what Bertalan Fodor was referring to is what's called the Just in Time compiler. The JIT must not be confused with Java's command line compiler. The command line compiler (or those built into IDEs) convert Java text source code into Java byte code (or p-code, if you like). The JIT is actually part of the runtime environment which, as the p-code is accessed, converts the p-code to native machine code. As you might imagine, this is quite a complicated task. So much so that Sun provides two different JITs, one tuned for client access (UIs and such) which converts p-code to native code almost immediately and one tuned for longer running servers, which takes a more analytical approach, making far better choices on machine code conversion based on usage patterns. Keep in mind to that in-lining is only one of a large variety of optimizations the JIT employs. Based on current benchmarks, Java software runs as fast or significantly faster than even hand-written C code. Even in Java 6 (just released) there are some very noticeable speed improvements. All the documentation about Java being slow is either very old (still touted about by anti-Java-ers) or the result of very poor application design and implementation (even the JIT can't overcome a bad programmer; the most typical issue being that the person using Java objects still writes their code very procedure-oriented, without properly switching to the object oriented paradigm). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Anthony W. Youngman Sent: Wed 12/13/2006 5:23 AM To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: lilypond and editors In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bertalan Fodor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Certainly not. Actually the java code is compiled to machine code at runtime. This is slower than precompiling, but the compiled code can run faster than its precompiled counterpart, because the runtime machine will have information about how often a certain part of the code is called, and those calls can be made inline. Running inline code is much faster than procedure calls. Bert Java code is actually a form of p-code (p standing for pseudo). Pseudo-code engines CAN be blindingly fast. There's a lot of history behind pseudo-code - like UCSD pascal for example, or the example dear to me, the Pick system. At least one system I ran implemented a lot of the Pick instruction code set in microcode, and indeed, I understand that is the way the transputer works. Any system with access to the first stage of a processor's pipeline and the ability to redefine it (ie any decent modern processor - don't know if that definition includes x86 :-) should be able to run p-code at the same sort of speed as native code. Cheers, Wol Erik Sandberg írta: On Saturday 09 December 2006 10:27, Bertalan Fodor wrote: Well, what is extremely important: development time is so little in Java and with JEdit (compared to any alternatives), that I won't change this platform. The price is that it will remain slow if you don't have much memory in the machine. I'm not a java expert, but wouldn't it get a lot faster if you compiled everything to native machine code (using gcj, for instance)? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user 2006-12-13, 05:26:57 The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may be privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your computer. 2006-12-13, 08:25:13 The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may be privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your computer. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman
Re: lilypond and editors
Well, jEdit is not fast. But it's LilyPondTool is. :-) Try it :-) I've never seen a Java application run fast on Windows, ever, in fact they are so slow that they are unbearable to use. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rick Hansen (aka RickH) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I've never seen a Java application run fast on Windows, ever, in fact they are so slow that they are unbearable to use. Is that Microsoft's JVM, or Sun's? And it wouldn't surprise me if there was code in Windows designed to sabotage the Sun JVM - they've done it so often to other stuff it would be unusual if they haven't done it to Sun's JVM too ... Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Anthony W. Youngman wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rick Hansen (aka RickH) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I've never seen a Java application run fast on Windows, ever, in fact they are so slow that they are unbearable to use. Is that Microsoft's JVM, or Sun's? And it wouldn't surprise me if there was code in Windows designed to sabotage the Sun JVM - they've done it so often to other stuff it would be unusual if they haven't done it to Sun's JVM too ... Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Well when I tried to install jEdit, it informed me that I needed to go get something from either the IBM or the SUN web sites. At the time I just got it from IBM. But I had no other issues with jEdit other than performance, especially with large files (over 2 MB). For work, I sometimes have to look at web logs, and those are about 100 MB long text files, I tried opening one up with jEdit and it simply locked itself up, whereas in other editors I could get to page 1 immediately in under a second. I think jEdit was actualy trying to read/parse the entire file, when my scrollbar was really just on page 1, but thats just a programming problem with jEdit I guess (that it should try to bring the whole 100MB file into memory at once). -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lilypond-and-editors-tf2734613.html#a7864890 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Yes, that's an architectural problem of jEdit. But this is not a problem for most lilypond files :-) But I had no other issues with jEdit other than performance, especially with large files (over 2 MB). For work, I sometimes have to look at web logs, and those are about 100 MB long text files, I tried opening one up with jEdit and it simply locked itself up, whereas in other editors I could get to page 1 immediately in under a second. I think jEdit was actualy trying to read/parse the entire file, when my scrollbar was really just on page 1, but thats just a programming problem with jEdit I guess (that it should try to bring the whole 100MB file into memory at once). -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lilypond-and-editors-tf2734613.html#a7864890 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fwd: lilypond and editors
Hello list, hello Arjan, You wrote: Remember: While all editors can save your files, only one can save your soul. (Per Abrahamsen on alt.religion.emacs) In deed, what he means, is the vi. :) Best Regards Roland ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
On Saturday 09 December 2006 10:27, Bertalan Fodor wrote: Well, what is extremely important: development time is so little in Java and with JEdit (compared to any alternatives), that I won't change this platform. The price is that it will remain slow if you don't have much memory in the machine. I'm not a java expert, but wouldn't it get a lot faster if you compiled everything to native machine code (using gcj, for instance)? -- Erik ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Certainly not. Actually the java code is compiled to machine code at runtime. This is slower than precompiling, but the compiled code can run faster than its precompiled counterpart, because the runtime machine will have information about how often a certain part of the code is called, and those calls can be made inline. Running inline code is much faster than procedure calls. Bert Erik Sandberg írta: On Saturday 09 December 2006 10:27, Bertalan Fodor wrote: Well, what is extremely important: development time is so little in Java and with JEdit (compared to any alternatives), that I won't change this platform. The price is that it will remain slow if you don't have much memory in the machine. I'm not a java expert, but wouldn't it get a lot faster if you compiled everything to native machine code (using gcj, for instance)? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Fwd: lilypond and editors
On 7 dec 2006, at 22:09, Thomas Scharkowski wrote: Just curious: what's wrong with jEdit? Thomas Remember: While all editors can save your files, only one can save your soul. (Per Abrahamsen on alt.religion.emacs) Arjan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Well, what is extremely important: development time is so little in Java and with JEdit (compared to any alternatives), that I won't change this platform. The price is that it will remain slow if you don't have much memory in the machine. But for example compare the loading speed of LilyPondTool's integrated PDF viewer with Adobe Reader's. Bert ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Geoff Horton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert Sometimes, yes. Often ... I don't know about that, and I'm not really a fan of the idea. Tools exist for me; I don't exist for tools. I'd agree with you. It's like Word. I hate it. I use WordPerfect, because it thinks the way I think. It's like when I go shooting. I use a rifle left-handed because if I try it right-handed (I am right-handed, by the way) I just CANNOT SEE what I'm doing. The right tool, in the right (in this case, the left :-) hand. If an editor's way of thinking doesn't match your way of thinking, it will simply get in the way and frustrate you every time you try and do anything slightly out of the ordinary. It just doesn't fit like a glove. Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Anthony W. Youngman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's like when I go shooting. I use a rifle left-handed because if I try it right-handed (I am right-handed, by the way) I just CANNOT SEE what I'm doing. Probably because you're left-eyed, just like me? This is also a problem when using a photo camera. -- Johan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Kate instructions [in the thread lilypond and editors]
confrey wrote: [...] tahnks, but I don't understand what you mean; what have I to install? kate only? Please be patient, I wait your reply, thanks confrey Here are the directions for installing the Linux/KDE Kate plugins (the Lilypond plugin is included in a tarball that contains a whole lot more syntax highlighting plugins). It is assumed that you have already installed kate, kate-plugins (as they are called in the Debian distro) and perl, these will most probably be included in your distro. I am using Kate 2.5.5 using KDE 3.5.5 and perl 5.8.8. If you do not run KDE and no other KDE programs yet, kate will need some basic kde libs and pull them with itself when using a packet manager, but you don't have to install the whole of KDE and can use any other window manager as well. So, here goes: 1) Download the archive to some directory (e.g., /usr/local/src), it seems you don't even have to throw the archive into the Kate plugin directory (/usr/share/apps/kate/plugins/ on my machine), any dir should do: # cd /usr/local/src # wget http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/ H/HA/HANJE/Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate-0.02.tar.gz (paste the two lines into one) (archive available through http://search.cpan.org/~HANJE/Syntax-Highlight-Engine -Kate-0.02/lib/Syntax/Highlight/Engine/Kate/LilyPond.pm 2) # tar -xvzf Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate-0.02.tar.gz 3) # cd Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate-0.02 3a) perhaps # less README 4) or immediately do # perl Makefile.PL # make # make install 5) open kate # kate 6) got to Settings - Configure Kate - Editor - Highlighting and 7) update some plugins by clicking Download and let the editor download updated plugins (lilypond is current at this time) 8) under Settings - Configure Kate - Editor - Open/Save you can select the font encoding, e.g. unicode utf8 if necessary 8a) Open # kcharselect if special characters are needed 9) under Settings - Configure Kate - Applications - Plugins you may want to activate the tab plugin and the snippet plugin (tab for snippet window appears on the left side of the Kate window; can also be activated by clicking Window - Tool Views - Show/Hide Snippets 10) Open or create a *.ly file. 11) Click the Snippets tab on the left side of Kate: Now you can create code snippets in the snippet window 12) In the Settings you can even define a script that could do whatever you want to your file, or under View you can switch on a command line, or, what I usually do, you can use the tab Terminal at the bottom edge of the Kate window: There you can use a resizeable terminal window that opens in the pwd, e.g. for running # lilypond filename.ly xpdf filename.pdf Enjoy (I guess I should put this on a web page - or are the instructions something for a lilypond.org sub-page?) Andreas v.H. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
So I would like to encourage anybody to give jEdit at least a try, I'd rather say some tries in regular intervals :-) LilyPondTool is under continous development nowadays and it evolves. Besides this a very exciting new feature is under testing now, which will make another big step in efficiency. (I don't tell what it is now because I'd like present it as a Christmas surprise :-) ) Bert ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
On Dec 8, 2006, at 2:40 AM, Bertalan Fodor wrote: So I would like to encourage anybody to give jEdit at least a try, I'd rather say some tries in regular intervals :-) LilyPondTool is under continous development nowadays and it evolves. Besides this a very exciting new feature is under testing now, which will make another big step in efficiency. (I don't tell what it is now because I'd like present it as a Christmas surprise :-) ) Bert As a long time user of Lilypond, and one who just recently found LilyPondTool, I am eager for Santa's arrival! Thank you! Stan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Geoff Horton wrote: Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert Sometimes, yes. Often ... I don't know about that, and I'm not really a fan of the idea. Tools exist for me; I don't exist for tools. I don't mean to discourage anyone from trying jEdit. I did. I prefer something else. YMMV :) Geoff ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user On Windows XP I gave jEdit a try, then I switched to Context. The main issues I had with jEdit on Windows is that it would not install unless I went to IBM or SUN microsystems web site to install some other stuff first as I recall. Then forums suggested I needed something called cygwin, big mistake there, after I installed that my machine was never the same, more sluggish. After I got jEdit finally working it kept locking up whenever I tried to open too many files simultaneously. Also if I opened a text file that was over say 2 meg or so, it would try to parse ending brackets for the WHOLE file, instead of just showing me the page I was on, and it typically took about 5 minutes to open these large files and 15 seconds for the PageUp/Down keys to work. With Context I've had several dozen files open simultaneously in its tabbed folders and my large files also open immediately. But I'm not sure of the future of Context either because it's author only makes updates once a year or so, but for now I'm productive with it. jEdit had a lot going for it functionality-wise, but it needs some work performance-wise and installation-wise for Windows machines from my experiences, maybe others like it on Windows but for me it did not work out. I think it sould be changed to install all of it's own dependencies itself, so at least users can begin using it immediately. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lilypond-and-editors-tf2734613.html#a7760420 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond-and editors
For me, I couldn't really get started w/ Lilypond until I installed jEdit and LilyPondTool. I'm running Win XP and I already had cygwin and JRE installed. jEdit is a bit slow to load and I haven't tried other editors to compare, but I like LilyPondTool and look forward to the Christmas present Bert says he has for us. I did have a little trouble installing LilyPondTool under jEdit, but it was worth it. I'm not a programmer, so I have a hard time with the braces and keeping things in the right place to make my files work, but a little trial and error and and I can get results. Without LilyPondTool, I think I would have given up. Tim Reeves Geoff Horton wrote: On Windows XP I gave jEdit a try, then I switched to Context. The main issues I had with jEdit on Windows is that it would not install unless I went to IBM or SUN microsystems web site to install some other stuff first as I recall. Then forums suggested I needed something called cygwin, big mistake there, after I installed that my machine was never the same, more sluggish. After I got jEdit finally working it kept locking up whenever I tried to open too many files simultaneously. Also if I opened a text file that was over say 2 meg or so, it would try to parse ending brackets for the WHOLE file, instead of just showing me the page I was on, and it typically took about 5 minutes to open these large files and 15 seconds for the PageUp/Down keys to work. With Context I've had several dozen files open simultaneously in its tabbed folders and my large files also open immediately. But I'm not sure of the future of Context either because it's author only makes updates once a year or so, but for now I'm productive with it. jEdit had a lot going for it functionality-wise, but it needs some work performance-wise and installation-wise for Windows machines from my experiences, maybe others like it on Windows but for me it did not work out. I think it sould be changed to install all of it's own dependencies itself, so at least users can begin using it immediately. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: lilypond and editors
Me too. I tried them both. ConText and the Lily highlighter worked fine straight out of the box (although I needed to make it case sensitive to correctly pick up the keywords) and I find it suits my style of working very well - usually with lots of files open; I failed to get jEdit to work even half right under MS XP and I've now deleted it. Trevor Geoff Horton wrote: Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert Sometimes, yes. Often ... I don't know about that, and I'm not really a fan of the idea. Tools exist for me; I don't exist for tools. I don't mean to discourage anyone from trying jEdit. I did. I prefer something else. YMMV :) Geoff ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user On Windows XP I gave jEdit a try, then I switched to Context. The main issues I had with jEdit on Windows is that it would not install unless I went to IBM or SUN microsystems web site to install some other stuff first as I recall. Then forums suggested I needed something called cygwin, big mistake there, after I installed that my machine was never the same, more sluggish. After I got jEdit finally working it kept locking up whenever I tried to open too many files simultaneously. Also if I opened a text file that was over say 2 meg or so, it would try to parse ending brackets for the WHOLE file, instead of just showing me the page I was on, and it typically took about 5 minutes to open these large files and 15 seconds for the PageUp/Down keys to work. With Context I've had several dozen files open simultaneously in its tabbed folders and my large files also open immediately. But I'm not sure of the future of Context either because it's author only makes updates once a year or so, but for now I'm productive with it. jEdit had a lot going for it functionality-wise, but it needs some work performance-wise and installation-wise for Windows machines from my experiences, maybe others like it on Windows but for me it did not work out. I think it sould be changed to install all of it's own dependencies itself, so at least users can begin using it immediately. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lilypond-and-editors-tf27346 13.html#a7760420 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: lilypond and editors
Citando Trevor Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I use LilyPondTool for jEdit and it is great and worth having it . My conclusion is that we may as well have two good text editors. Since I know, that jEdit is slower and I also experienced crashes or very slow instances when the Lilypond documentation was open besides a few files. Well that second editor I haven't decided for my case, maybe I'll settle with ConText. I've tried it a bit. And a faster editor is good for a quick check of files, and so on. But when I'm concentrated with Lilypond files, jEdit has been a real asset. I know we resist to learn extra stuff, but in my case, I want to learn better jEdit and enough of a second good editor. Eduardo Me too. I tried them both. ConText and the Lily highlighter worked fine straight out of the box (although I needed to make it case sensitive to correctly pick up the keywords) and I find it suits my style of working very well - usually with lots of files open; I failed to get jEdit to work even half right under MS XP and I've now deleted it. Trevor Geoff Horton wrote: Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert Sometimes, yes. Often ... I don't know about that, and I'm not really a fan of the idea. Tools exist for me; I don't exist for tools. I don't mean to discourage anyone from trying jEdit. I did. I prefer something else. YMMV :) Geoff ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user On Windows XP I gave jEdit a try, then I switched to Context. The main issues I had with jEdit on Windows is that it would not install unless I went to IBM or SUN microsystems web site to install some other stuff first as I recall. Then forums suggested I needed something called cygwin, big mistake there, after I installed that my machine was never the same, more sluggish. After I got jEdit finally working it kept locking up whenever I tried to open too many files simultaneously. Also if I opened a text file that was over say 2 meg or so, it would try to parse ending brackets for the WHOLE file, instead of just showing me the page I was on, and it typically took about 5 minutes to open these large files and 15 seconds for the PageUp/Down keys to work. With Context I've had several dozen files open simultaneously in its tabbed folders and my large files also open immediately. But I'm not sure of the future of Context either because it's author only makes updates once a year or so, but for now I'm productive with it. jEdit had a lot going for it functionality-wise, but it needs some work performance-wise and installation-wise for Windows machines from my experiences, maybe others like it on Windows but for me it did not work out. I think it sould be changed to install all of it's own dependencies itself, so at least users can begin using it immediately. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lilypond-and-editors-tf27346 13.html#a7760420 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Have a good day! ___ Com o Click21 você tem sempre vantagens! Além do email com 1 Gb, Acelerador, Blog, Flog, Games e atendimento 24 horas, voce também pode falar minutos DDD com a promoção Click 21 Minutos. Quanto mais você navega mais fala DDD. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Yes, opening the documentation needs to give more memory to jEdit... If you let it use more, that is you run jEdit with the command java -Xmx256m -jar jedit.jar there will be no slow instances even when you open the regression test document. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Thank you for your answer Bertalan. I'm CCing to the list because it is somehow related to the topic. Valentin Villenave írta: Hi Bertalan, I would like to know how much localized is LilyPondTool, and if anyone can help you translating it. I can, for instance, contribute to correct the French language file, and since there is a French mailing list now, I could help transmitting your announcements or whatever... Thank you. V.Villenave. 2006/12/8, Bertalan Fodor [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Well, LilyPondTool is not localized at all. AFAIK jEdit is not either. First you we need LilyPond to write its error messages with an error code, to let us interpret independently of language. Second, I must create some property files that can be localized. This can be a semi-automatic process, so if you think there would be many French users, I can do it. But that will work only for the LilyPondTool parts, and not the jEdit core. I had already seen somewhere jEdit wasn't localized and wasn't ever going to be, I just didn't remember it. As a matter of fact, jEdit is a bit weak on a few points, and this one of those; another one is, in my opinion, that its extremely heavy and slow, even on a Linux machine, maybe due to its Java origins, I don't know; the fact is, every time I use it I can't help remember older times when I was running *some* proprietary heavy notation software under *some* proprietary heavy Operating System. However, I find (and so do many of us) LilyPondTool is the best way to typeset LilyPond code, particularly for newbies, and I wouldn't have jEdit installed at all otherwise. So to my mind, this is LilyTool's only weakness. So, concerning translation, I would be glad to contribute. If LilyTool's localization is easy to do, just tell me how it can be done, or please send a language file (if there's any) so I can start to work on it, and maybe post it on the French mailing list. I think it's worth doing it, because once again I find LilyPondTool great. I just hope that maybe, in a few years (months ?), _somebody_ will be able to make it standalone. Maybe yourself, who knows... :) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
confrey wrote: Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey kate with colored syntax (downloadable somewhere), utf-encoding, command line window for compiling, code snippet and session saving. Rocks. Andreas v.H. (sorry for PM) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
confrey wrote: Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey kate with colored syntax (downloadable somewhere), utf-encoding, command line window for compiling, code snippet and session saving. Rocks. Andreas v.H. (sorry for PM) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Hi everyone, On the same subject, I would like to propose an improvement for the Lilypond editor on Mac OS (mine is 10.4). It would be really nice if we could point and click on an error message and the code creating the error would be highlighted. Or, an easier thing to program, a line and character counter in the editor would be great, since the error messages give the line number where the bug is. It would be a great improvement. By the way, is there any editor having LilyPond tool other than jEdit? Thanks, Frédéric Chiasson 2006/12/7, Andreas v. Heydwolff [EMAIL PROTECTED]: confrey wrote: Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey kate with colored syntax (downloadable somewhere), utf-encoding, command line window for compiling, code snippet and session saving. Rocks. Andreas v.H. (sorry for PM) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Lilypond and editors
I run lilypond under windows Xp, and actually I´m using a very naice editor (notepad II) It works excellent, whit all the features needed for lilypond. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Just curious: what's wrong with jEdit? Thomas Hi everyone, On the same subject, I would like to propose an improvement for the Lilypond editor on Mac OS (mine is 10.4). It would be really nice if we could point and click on an error message and the code creating the error would be highlighted. Or, an easier thing to program, a line and character counter in the editor would be great, since the error messages give the line number where the bug is. It would be a great improvement. By the way, is there any editor having LilyPond tool other than jEdit? Thanks, Frédéric Chiasson 2006/12/7, Andreas v. Heydwolff [EMAIL PROTECTED]: confrey wrote: Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey kate with colored syntax (downloadable somewhere), utf-encoding, command line window for compiling, code snippet and session saving. Rocks. Andreas v.H. (sorry for PM) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
On 12/7/06, Thomas Scharkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious: what's wrong with jEdit? Thomas Editors are one of those things that really depend on personal taste. It may just be that I've been using emacs for too long, but jEdit drove me nuts. Others have their favorite way of doing things, and jEdit may or may not work well with that. So what's wrong with jEdit? Nothing, if it fits the way you work. Geoff ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert So what's wrong with jEdit? Nothing, if it fits the way you work. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert Sometimes, yes. Often ... I don't know about that, and I'm not really a fan of the idea. Tools exist for me; I don't exist for tools. I don't mean to discourage anyone from trying jEdit. I did. I prefer something else. YMMV :) Geoff ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Well, I never tried jEdit on Mac. But I tried it on PC and the LilypondTool didn't work out and I had so many problems that I discarded it after a week. Maybe I should give it a second shot. It migth work better on Mac OS. Thanks for the comments, Frédéric 2006/12/7, Bertalan Fodor [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert So what's wrong with jEdit? Nothing, if it fits the way you work. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Should you have any problems I'm here to help ;-) Remember to look at http://lilypondtool.organum.hu Bert Frédéric Chiasson írta: Well, I never tried jEdit on Mac. But I tried it on PC and the LilypondTool didn't work out and I had so many problems that I discarded it after a week. Maybe I should give it a second shot. It migth work better on Mac OS. Thanks for the comments, Frédéric 2006/12/7, Bertalan Fodor [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert So what's wrong with jEdit? Nothing, if it fits the way you work. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Frédéric Chiasson kirjoitti: Well, I never tried jEdit on Mac. But I tried it on PC and the LilypondTool didn't work out and I had so many problems that I discarded it after a week. On the other hand, I have used jEdit with LilypondTool on PC (SuSE and Ubuntu linux) for over two years on almost daily basis; here this combination has worked all the time and has grown better and better, (IMHO, that is. ) So I would like to encourage anybody to give jEdit at least a try, I find jEdit with LilypondTool quite an effective tool. my best wishes, Tapio ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
If you are on Windows, I created this syntax highlighter for the Context editor: www.context.cx Here is the highlighter plug in I created: http://forum.context.cx/index.php?topic=1396.0 First download/install Context editor, then download/copy the highlighter file to the appropriate directory, then whenever you open a ly file in context it will be highlighted, it also separates scheme code from lilypond code style-wise. I entered around 700 or so lilypond reserverd words in the highlighter and the sceme code appears with a gray background, it also matches opening/closing brackets, hilights comments differently, etc. and acceps unicode or ascii data. So long as you only need ASCII then it's probably ok, but last time I checked it did *not* support UTF-8 properly (even though it claims something along the lines of utf-8 awareness on the front page) so at least for me, it's pretty much useless.. YMMV of course.. my 0.02€ Simon ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Before choosing an editor to work with, do not forget to look at the Flash demos of LilyPondTool, especially: http://lilypondtool.organum.hu/tut03-myfirstsong.htm and http://www.organum.hu/126.0.html Then you can choose any other editors, but keep in mind what you lose :-) Bert ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
However, this section is not quite up-to-date. Especially regarding my child, LilyPondTool :-) Look at http://lilypondtool.organum.hu (Demo and Documentation/Flash tutorials would give you an impression of what it does) Bert Mats Bengtsson írta: There's a section on Editor support in the manual, did you read that? Also, you could try to search the mailing list archives to get even more hints. /Mats confrey wrote: Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Could you please propose an updated formulation to include in the manual. /Mats Bertalan Fodor wrote: However, this section is not quite up-to-date. Especially regarding my child, LilyPondTool :-) Look at http://lilypondtool.organum.hu (Demo and Documentation/Flash tutorials would give you an impression of what it does) Bert Mats Bengtsson írta: There's a section on Editor support in the manual, did you read that? Also, you could try to search the mailing list archives to get even more hints. /Mats confrey wrote: Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
confrey wrote: Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey -- confrey Linux Registered User#240359 Linux Registered Machine #133789 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user If you are on Windows, I created this syntax highlighter for the Context editor: www.context.cx Here is the highlighter plug in I created: http://forum.context.cx/index.php?topic=1396.0 First download/install Context editor, then download/copy the highlighter file to the appropriate directory, then whenever you open a ly file in context it will be highlighted, it also separates scheme code from lilypond code style-wise. I entered around 700 or so lilypond reserverd words in the highlighter and the sceme code appears with a gray background, it also matches opening/closing brackets, hilights comments differently, etc. and acceps unicode or ascii data. Context is a great multi-tabbed, editor with a directory navigator, and support for code libraries, etc. I've been using it since July or so and am very satisfied with it. Rick -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lilypond-and-editors-tf2734613.html#a7649157 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
lilypond and editors
Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey -- confrey Linux Registered User#240359 Linux Registered Machine #133789 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
There's a section on Editor support in the manual, did you read that? Also, you could try to search the mailing list archives to get even more hints. /Mats confrey wrote: Hi everybody, I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). bye confrey -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
