2010/12/31 Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu:
I think I agree, but this rule does not agree with the engraving books. So
if we go this way we're breaking new ground. That makes me nervous. I
certainly wouldn't want to do this without get agreement from a larger
number of the core
Hi,
Are you using a two-element list, or a cons cell? The two are not the same.
I seem to remember looking in the code, and seeing scm_cadr calls, which
implies that your alterations would be (1 -1), not (1 . -1).
In scheme I am using a cons cell, in C++ I am using a new struct with
On 30 Dec 2010, at 23:16, Felipe Gonçalves Assis wrote:
1. How should we represent alterations?
It is clear to me that the most general representation would be as
a list of integers of arbitrary length (see sections 1 and 2 of the
attachment).
I made a proposal for a representation, and
On 31 December 2010 04:43, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
If we are going to move to a list for alterations, the list should probably
be rationals, rather than integers, in order to be most general. Thus it
should most likely be (1/2 -1/4), rather
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 01:29:45PM +0200, Dave Plater wrote:
In the 2.12.3 doc build info/lilypond was a symlink to
doc/lilypond/html/Documentation/user and info/lilypond-snippets was
a link to doc/packages/lilypond/html/input/lsr I've read through all
the building documentation references I
2010/12/31 Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com:
On 30 Dec 2010, at 23:16, Felipe Gonçalves Assis wrote:
I made a proposal for a representation, and there is Haskell code available
if you are interested.
Hi Hans. I would very much appreciate that code. I should remark
that your emails are what
2010/12/31 Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu:
On 12/29/10 4:32 PM, Janek Warchoł lemniskata.bernoull...@gmail.com
wrote:
I prefer B because it is the most balanced one - the 16ths don't look
cramped, and the 8ths don't look 'airy' when compared to 16ths
(especially the beamed variant. I think
On 31 Dec 2010, at 10:59, Felipe Gonçalves Assis wrote:
I made a proposal for a representation, and there is Haskell code
available
if you are interested.
Hi Hans. I would very much appreciate that code.
I have put it up here.
On 2010/12/29 05:18:07, Keith wrote:
Agreed. My earlier 'arbitrary' was a mental slip. I was thinking the
choice was
sensible, but even if it were arbitrary I would be scared of change.
The order for the chord entry was requested by the users. Chords
are
generally
entered lowest note
On 2010/12/29 05:18:07, Keith wrote:
ly/string-tunings-init.ly:43: (make-music 'SequentialMusic 'void #t)))
We need to save the string tuning in a Scheme variable...
But if it is possible to set the variable as you do now, and then
return a
PropertySet instead of the void event,
(begin
Thanks for the code, Hans!
There are many things I am curious about. Now that I have the sources,
I will spend some time analysing them, and then contact you.
While I need some time to study your considerations, what I can say now is:
. If, under a given musical system, what is printed on the
On 12/31/10 1:31 AM, Felipe Gonçalves Assis felipeg.as...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
Are you using a two-element list, or a cons cell? The two are not the same.
I seem to remember looking in the code, and seeing scm_cadr calls, which
implies that your alterations would be (1 -1), not (1 .
Hello,
In CG 5.4.3 Checking Cross References there is a para that refers to
http://kainhofer.com/~lilypond/linkdoc/
This link however gives a 404.
Thanks
James
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
No need to decide how many of them. Just make the argument a list,
instead of a cons cell, and give the user access to change the length
of the list if they want to.
Huh? Access to change the length of the list? We are talking about a
list, don't
On 12/31/10 8:46 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
No need to decide how many of them. Just make the argument a list,
instead of a cons cell, and give the user access to change the length
of the list if they want to.
Huh? Access to change
On 31 Dec 2010, at 16:19, Felipe Gonçalves Assis wrote:
Thanks for the code, Hans!
There are many things I am curious about. Now that I have the sources,
I will spend some time analysing them, and then contact you.
While I need some time to study your considerations, what I can say
now is:
Ok, Carl,
You vote for a list of integers, with arbitrary length.
There is actually no complication in not specifying its size.
Te midi engraver, for example, would just ignore entries
for which no value was specified. And in transpositions,
the unspecified values would just be considered zero.
On 12/31/10 10:28 AM, Felipe Gonçalves Assis felipeg.as...@gmail.com
wrote:
Ok, Carl,
You vote for a list of integers, with arbitrary length.
I'm not sure I vote, yet. I'm still in discussion mode.
I *do* vote for either a number or a list, so that the current behavior can
continue.
I
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 05:35:43PM +0100, Sven Axelsson wrote:
Perhaps a starting point would be if someone could have a look at what
I'm doing in https://github.com/svenax/bagpipemusic/. The relevant
file is bagpipe_new.ly, and there are lots of examples on how to use
it in the repo as well.
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:30:29AM +, James Lowe wrote:
I have just downloaded and installed the windows version of 2.13.44-1 and the
'welcome to lilypond' default file seems to have completely changed.
I can't reproduce on linux with wine; the initial file looks like
normal to me, and the
Hello,
I will be away for about three days, so you might have to wait
for replies to any questions to me addressed. When I'm back
I'll read every post in this thread, and answer the relevant
questions.
Happy New Gregorian Year!
Felipe
___
Graham Percival wrote Friday, December 31, 2010 11:20 PM
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 08:43:36PM +, Keith OHara wrote:
Trevor Daniels t.daniels at treda.co.uk writes:
Graham Percival wrote Thursday, December 30, 2010 3:56 AM
I want to keep the word intentionally, though -- if
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Please review.
Description:
CG: out-of-tree building in main compile chapter.
Please review this at http://codereview.appspot.com/3823045/
Affected files:
M Documentation/included/compile.itexi
Index: Documentation/included/compile.itexi
diff --git
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Graham Percival
gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:30:29AM +, James Lowe wrote:
I have just downloaded and installed the windows version of 2.13.44-1 and
the 'welcome to lilypond' default file seems to have completely changed.
I
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 16:31:23 -0800, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk
wrote:
... the concern I had was this. Quite a lot of the
documentation was written, not by inspecting the code
to see what was intended, but by experimenting and
writing up what was found. I certainly worked that
way,
I've responded to all the commandments and put up a new patch.
Thanks for all of your input.
Please review.
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/3842041/diff/6001/Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely
File Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely (right):
We are, yet again, about 10-20 hours of work away from having 0
critical issues. This is a familiar position; we've been like
this since mid-August. There's a tiny chance of releasing 2.14 in
January, and only a small chance of having it in Feb. As we
slowly fix Critical issues, people discover
On Sat, Jan 01, 2011 at 12:31:23AM -, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Graham Percival wrote Friday, December 31, 2010 11:20 PM
However, lilypond never intentionally tried to
avoid those objects colliding -- in fact, intentionally avoiding
this collision would require a fair chunk of extra code.
28 matches
Mail list logo
