Re: Dot-notehead collision

2011-03-18 Thread Keith OHara
On Mar 15, 2011, at 6:51 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: address@hidden wrote Tuesday, March 15, 2011 5:00 PM \relative c' { \time 3/4 << { 4 2 } \\ { d2. } >> } Produces the attached output. Is there a way to get it so that the dot does not collide with the notehead (w/o resorting to extra offsets

Re: Map voices to channels in MIDI output

2011-03-18 Thread Keith OHara
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 06:39:26 -0700, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: Keith OHara schreef op di 15-03-2011 om 23:09 [-0700]: I tried to summarize what the relevant classes do, and indicated the desired extensions in [[ ]] below : Not really: * midiChannelMapping = #'instrument (default) midiIns

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

2011-03-18 Thread Phil Holmes
On 3/18/11 5:23 AM, "Phil Holmes" wrote: I think Read's example flags are very inconsistent, so it's hard to decide what the details of the flags should be. I've looked throughout his book, and the flags change from occurrence to occurrence. Thanks, Carl Agreed. They look very hand-d

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

2011-03-18 Thread Janek Warchoł
W dniu 18 marca 2011 14:26 użytkownik Carl Sorensen napisał: > > I think Read's example flags are very inconsistent, so it's hard to decide > what the details of the flags should be.  I've looked throughout his book, > and the flags change from occurrence to occurrence. Indeed. I'd say they look

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

2011-03-18 Thread Janek Warchoł
2011/3/18 Phil Holmes : > In general I do agree with your approach of making our own decisions based > on what's published, rather than just following it.  However, I do think the > current flags are inconsistent if you compare the up-stem quaver with the > semi-quaver.  The quaver's flag stops at

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

2011-03-18 Thread Trevor Daniels
Janek Warchoł wrote Friday, March 18, 2011 11:41 AM I've prepared flag touch-ups, including changes suggested by Carl. They are here: http://codereview.appspot.com/4273074/ I attach a simple proof-sheet showing these changes. I prefer your suggested flags. Thanks. Trevor

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

2011-03-18 Thread Carl Sorensen
On 3/18/11 5:23 AM, "Phil Holmes" wrote: > Janek, > > I prefer the newer ones, although I doubt I'll use them too often in real > music! > > However, I was looking at my Gardner Read and think that, strictly, all the > flag shapes are a little wrong according to his "rules". The quaver fl

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

2011-03-18 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> I prefer our Feta font. +1 Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: downstem 64th and 128th flag touchup (issue4273074)

2011-03-18 Thread Carl . D . Sorensen
LGTM. Carl http://codereview.appspot.com/4273074/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

2011-03-18 Thread Phil Holmes
- Original Message - From: "Janek Warchoł" To: "Phil Holmes" Cc: Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 1:01 PM Subject: Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags 2011/3/18 Phil Holmes : > Janek, > > I prefer the newer ones, Glad to hear this! > althou

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

2011-03-18 Thread Janek Warchoł
2011/3/18 Phil Holmes : > Janek, > > I prefer the newer ones, Glad to hear this! > although I doubt I'll use them too often in real music! Me too :) > However, I was looking at my Gardner Read and think that, strictly, all the > flag shapes are a little wrong according to his "rules".  The quav

Re: Persistent error on 'make': [Python] ordinal not in range(128)

2011-03-18 Thread Graham Percival
On 3/17/11, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Graham Percival schreef op do 17-03-2011 om 18:54 [+]: > >> Well, maybe somebody could spend 15 making this work, then we >> wouldn't need to discuss it any more? > > Please try the attached patch. Also consider I can build on the command-line. IIRC th

downstem 64th and 128th flag touchup (issue4273074)

2011-03-18 Thread lemniskata . bernoullego
This changes correspond to http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-03/msg00399.html (You can see changes in fonts by running mf '\mode:=proof; input feta-noteheads20' gftodvi feta-noteheads20.2602gf from /mf directory and comparing dvi files before and after a patch, or compilin

Re: Persistent error on 'make': [Python] ordinal not in range(128)

2011-03-18 Thread Francisco Vila
2011/3/18 Francisco Vila : > I have applied in my tree, removed python/*.pyc and 'make' still says > > /usr/bin/python ../scripts/lilypond-book.py (...) usage.tely > (...) > File "/home/fravd/source/lilypond/python/out/lilylib.py", line 57, in > encoded_write >    f.write (s.encode (f.encoding or '

Re: Persistent error on 'make': [Python] ordinal not in range(128)

2011-03-18 Thread Francisco Vila
2011/3/17 Jan Nieuwenhuizen : > Graham Percival schreef op do 17-03-2011 om 18:54 [+]: > >> Well, maybe somebody could spend 15 making this work, then we >> wouldn't need to discuss it any more? > > Please try the attached patch. I have applied in my tree, removed python/*.pyc and 'make' still

Avoid repeats of 'staff-affinity' warning; change text. (issue4278058)

2011-03-18 Thread tdanielsmusic
LGTM I like this warning text. Much better. Trevor http://codereview.appspot.com/4278058/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel