Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-10 Thread Graham Percival
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 4:38 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > >> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:37 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> And of course, adding more information is done _automatically_ when >>> someone responds to the tracked report.  So adding to the tracker >>> with a c

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-10 Thread David Kastrup
Graham Percival writes: > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:37 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> And of course, adding more information is done _automatically_ when >> someone responds to the tracked report.  So adding to the tracker >> with a canned phrase "Small example, and error symptom still missing" >

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-10 Thread Graham Percival
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:37 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > >> If you >> can't reject the report for having no Tiny example, no version number, >> not being able to reproduce it, etc., then you MUST move on to the >> final point, namely adding it to the tracker. > > I should

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-10 Thread David Kastrup
Graham Percival writes: > PS note that the "new email checklist" does *not* contain an item for > "ignore the email and hope that somebody else handles it". If you > can't reject the report for having no Tiny example, no version number, > not being able to reproduce it, etc., then you MUST move

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-10 Thread Graham Percival
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 03:32:46PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote: > I have (sorta) planned to do this as soon as I have a bit more time > (several dozen hours are easily required), aka later this month. If it takes you longer than 10 minutes to process a single email, you're doing something wron

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-10 Thread Valentin Villenave
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Graham Percival wrote: > Focus on processing other old reports that haven't been dealt with > yet. I have (sorta) planned to do this as soon as I have a bit more time (several dozen hours are easily required), aka later this month. As for David's bug, it does rem

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-10 Thread Graham Percival
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 09:46:49AM +0300, Dmytro O. Redchuk wrote: > I didn't know that all "programming errors" should be considered as unexpected > and therefore should be recorded. I'll try to figure out why i didn't. Don't waste your time; that's something for the CG to state, and as you know

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread Dmytro O. Redchuk
On Fri 04 Jun 2010, 17:52 David Kastrup wrote: > David Kastrup writes: [...] > \new Voice \with {\consists "Ambitus_engraver"} { s4*0 \new Voice { c''4 } } > > creates the above errors. Thank you, added as 1113: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1113 > > -- > David Kastrup

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread David Kastrup
Graham Percival writes: > On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 4:55 PM, James Bailey > wrote: >> Am I to understand that a programming error should have a bug report? > > Yes; current policy is to record all warnings (even "false warnings", > which produce good output but include an unexpected error/warning >

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread Graham Percival
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 4:55 PM, James Bailey wrote: > Am I to understand that a programming error should have a bug report? Yes; current policy is to record all warnings (even "false warnings", which produce good output but include an unexpected error/warning message on the console). This is a c

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread James Bailey
On 09.06.2010, at 17:28, Graham Percival wrote: On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: But in this case, it is probably because hardly anyone is really using the Ambitus_engraver. In my case, I have no particular knowledge, so I can't help you in any way and thus cannot

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread David Kastrup
Reinhold Kainhofer writes: > Am Mittwoch, 9. Juni 2010, 16:52:58 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Uh, am I by now in everybody's killfile, or do people just enjoy having >> me throw a fit for every contribution? > > To be honest, I can imagine that some people might really choose to ignore > your pos

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread Graham Percival
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > But in this case, it is probably because hardly anyone is really using the > Ambitus_engraver. In my case, I have no particular knowledge, so I can't help > you in any way and thus cannot answer. That's no excuse for the Bug Squad, thoug

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread David Kastrup
"Dmytro O. Redchuk" writes: > On Wed 09 Jun 2010, 16:52 David Kastrup wrote: > >> Anyway, I should think that this bug description including a list of >> relevant examples should warrant being recorded by the bug squad. > i simply can not understand (tm) what's the problem (tm): The error messag

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread Graham Percival
David, I wrote to you privately to say that I was aware of your report, and would send an "ungently public reminder to the Bug Squad if they hadn't dealt with it in a few days". Now, you could argue that it had been more than "a few days", but I wanted to give them a few days to catch up without

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread Reinhold Kainhofer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Mittwoch, 9. Juni 2010, 16:52:58 schrieb David Kastrup: > Uh, am I by now in everybody's killfile, or do people just enjoy having > me throw a fit for every contribution? To be honest, I can imagine that some people might really choose to ignore

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread Dmytro O. Redchuk
On Wed 09 Jun 2010, 16:52 David Kastrup wrote: > Uh, am I by now in everybody's killfile Not at all, be sure, > Anyway, I should think that this bug description including a list of > relevant examples should warrant being recorded by the bug squad. i simply can not understand (tm) what's the probl

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-09 Thread David Kastrup
Uh, am I by now in everybody's killfile, or do people just enjoy having me throw a fit for every contribution? If it is the latter, I am afraid that I am currently hospitalized because of my blood pressure and I sort of think that my doctors would disapprove. Tough luck. Maybe next time. Anywa

Re: What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-04 Thread David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes: > When compiling > > \new Voice \with {\consists "Ambitus_engraver"} > {<<\new Voice { c } s>> { c } } > > I get the following two "programming error"s. What's up? A simpler test case is \new Voice \with {\consists "Ambitus_engraver"} { \new Voice { c'' } } The key point

What's the deal with this "programming error"?

2010-06-03 Thread David Kastrup
When compiling \new Voice \with {\consists "Ambitus_engraver"} {<<\new Voice { c } s>> { c } } I get the following two "programming error"s. What's up? lilypond /tmp/junk.ly GNU LilyPond 2.13.23 Processing `/tmp/junk.ly' Parsing... /tmp/junk.ly:0: warning: no \version statement found, please a