Hi David,
This is so cool! and smart.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4974046/diff/1/scm/parser-ly-from-scheme.scm
File scm/parser-ly-from-scheme.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4974046/diff/1/scm/parser-ly-from-scheme.scm#newcode36
scm/parser-ly-from-scheme.scm:36:
On Aug 28, 2011, at 4:33 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 03:19:00AM +0100, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 05:14:00PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote:
This afternoon I've done a fresh pull, make and make doc. Make doc
failed with this:
Indeed. It needed to run
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:29:28AM +0200, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
Please let me know what I could do to prevent this from happening again
Since you were editing documentation, I would have liked you to
have:
1. touch Documentation/*.te??
(this tells make to check all manuals to see if
- Original Message -
From: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca
To: Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net; m...@apollinemike.com
Cc: Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 3:33 AM
Subject: Re: Make doc fails
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 03:19:00AM +0100, Graham Percival
W dniu 27 sierpnia 2011 15:51 użytkownik Carl Sorensen
c_soren...@byu.edu napisał:
On 8/27/11 7:44 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 8/27/11 7:21 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
I wonder
770 was claimed fixed in 2.14.2 but on my PC it appears it isn't:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=770
--
Phil Holmes
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Patch fails on tree as of 28 August.
patching file scm/music-functions.scm
Hunk #2 FAILED at 415.
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
scm/music-functions.scm.rej
jlowe@jlowe-lilybuntu2:~/lilypond-git$
http://codereview.appspot.com/4387046/
On Aug 28, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Phil Holmes wrote:
- Original Message - From: Graham Percival
gra...@percival-music.ca
To: Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net; m...@apollinemike.com
Cc: Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 3:33 AM
Subject: Re: Make doc fails
passes make and reg tests
http://codereview.appspot.com/4819064/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reviewers: ,
Message:
This gets rid of Stem #'length in the docs. I haven't run make doc yet,
but I will right after this and will report back in a couple hours with
a new patch that makes any additional necessary changes.
Cheers,
MS
Description:
Gets rid of length in the docs.
Please review
passes make and reg tests
http://codereview.appspot.com/4868046/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Am Sunday, 28. August 2011, 11:29:28 schrieb m...@apollinemike.com:
As for the convert-ly rule, I was under the impression that these rules
were pushed on a version-to-version basis, and all syntax changes were
written as one rule before the rolling of the next version.
Nope. As soon as you
Passes make and reg tests - one difference in reg test that is expected
and attached for completeness here:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=723#c4
http://codereview.appspot.com/4966042/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 10:46:24AM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote:
I think that's fixed one problem, but I can't test because another
change appears to have created another problem:
Unbound variable: ly:stem::pure-calc-stem-end-position
command failed:
amusingly, I have no trouble compiling the docs without this patch, but
it fails with this patch applied:
/main/src/lilypond/build/out/lybook-db/b5/lily-2dcca534.ly:1097:9:
warning: no viable initial configuration found: may not find good beam
slope
c ees8 f g
Segmentation
- Original Message -
From: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca
To: Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net
Cc: m...@apollinemike.com; Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: Make doc fails
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 10:46:24AM +0100, Phil Holmes
passes make and reg tests.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4837047/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Mike I get a failed patch apply here on the current tre (28 Aug)
--snip--
patching file lily/beam.cc
Hunk #1 succeeded at 1865 (offset 72 lines).
patching file lily/include/beam.hh
Hunk #1 succeeded at 69 with fuzz 2.
patching file lily/include/stem-tremolo.hh
patching file lily/include/stem.hh
On 8/28/11 3:29 AM, m...@apollinemike.com m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
As for the convert-ly rule, I was under the impression that these rules were
pushed on a version-to-version basis, and all syntax changes were written as
one rule before the rolling of the next version. The last time I
Still passes make and reg tests
http://codereview.appspot.com/4636081/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 8/28/11 3:52 AM, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com wrote:
W dniu 27 sierpnia 2011 15:51 użytkownik Carl Sorensen
c_soren...@byu.edu napisał:
The a to b beam would have a slope of 1 ss per eighth note.
The c to f beam would have a slope of 3 ss per eighth note.
the a to f beam
I believe the subdivision issues are now fixed.
Please review.
Thanks,
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/4941041/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reviewers: nicolas.sceaux,
Message:
This passes regtests. I would tend towards committing in this form in
order to keep commit size to the point. Instead of a separate regtest,
I'd likely walk through scm and ly directories and use this
functionality where appropriate.
New patch set uploaded - haven't finished building docs yet, but I think
this will go through to the end. Will report back in a couple hours
(make doc nearly done, but I have to leave the house).
Cheers,
MS
http://codereview.appspot.com/4965053/
___
Ha...how about that.
I'll look into it when I get back, but good to know that the docs are
compilable without this patch applied.
Cheers,
MS
http://codereview.appspot.com/4965053/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
Here is a fun example:
the extending documentation contains the example
Inline Scheme code
The main disadvantage of `\tweak' is its syntactical inflexibility.
For example, the following produces a syntax error.
F = \tweak
- Original Message -
From: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca
To: Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net
Cc: m...@apollinemike.com; Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: Make doc fails
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 10:46:24AM +0100, Phil Holmes
- Original Message -
From: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca
I wasn't expecting you to be able to put this together without
asking questions (since it's taken even me a while to put stuff
together), but more specific questions about be good.
Thanks for this so far. Now docs
Ok, I guess this is as good as it gets. I've put in some uses in
programming-interfaces.itely particularly in connection with markups and
markup lists, and I feel that this makes dealing with a number of things
more pleasant.
For example, the markup macro should rarely if ever be needed
Hey all,
I got a clean doc build with this newest patch set - please confirm.
Cheers,
MS
http://codereview.appspot.com/4965053/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Hey all,
Just a note to say that the intermittent inconsistencies that I was getting in
the regtests for beam-slope-stemlet.ly (check out my first e-mail about the
stem patch under The Ugly) have come up again in a regtest I recently ran.
I'm almost 100% positive that this is due to my stem
On Aug 28, 2011, at 4:58 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
- Original Message - From: Graham Percival
gra...@percival-music.ca
To: Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net
Cc: m...@apollinemike.com; Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: Make doc fails
On
On Aug 28, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 8/28/11 3:29 AM, m...@apollinemike.com m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
As for the convert-ly rule, I was under the impression that these rules were
pushed on a version-to-version basis, and all syntax changes were written as
one rule
Hi David,
#(define-markup-command (double-box layout props text) (markup?)
Draw a double box around text.
(interpret-markup layout props
#{\markup \override #'(box-padding . 0.4) \box \override #'(box-padding .
0.6) \box { $text } #}))
After all, that looks decidedly less obscure
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
Hi David,
#(define-markup-command (double-box layout props text) (markup?)
Draw a double box around text.
(interpret-markup layout props
#{\markup \override #'(box-padding . 0.4) \box \override #'(box-padding
. 0.6) \box { $text
I have decided to be an ass and push this change. It touches
astonishingly little code, is surprisingly useful and simplifies
extending Lilypond considerably, passes the regtests, and I like its
code.
It would be a pity not to make it available to users. The programming
documentation, in spite
On Aug 28, 2011, at 7:23 PM, mts...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey all,
I got a clean doc build with this newest patch set - please confirm.
Cheers,
MS
http://codereview.appspot.com/4965053/
A heads up to everyone that I'm going on vacation on Thursday for two weeks and
that I'll be without
On 11-08-28 03:05 PM, Mike Solomon wrote:
On Aug 28, 2011, at 7:23 PM, mts...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey all,
I got a clean doc build with this newest patch set - please confirm.
Cheers,
MS
http://codereview.appspot.com/4965053/
A heads up to everyone that I'm going on vacation on Thursday for
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 04:03:10PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote:
6. run
make -f ../make/website.make WEBSITE_ONLY_BUILD=1 \
TOP_SRC_DIR=$HOME/src/lilypond/ \
TEXI2HTML_PROGRAM=texi2html \
website
Can't make this work. $HOME/src/lilypond doesn't exist on my
system. Thinking about
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 08:00:14PM +, d...@gnu.org wrote:
It would be a pity not to make it available to users.
Do you want to dump something in changes.tely to let users know
about this?
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 08:00:14PM +, d...@gnu.org wrote:
It would be a pity not to make it available to users.
Do you want to dump something in changes.tely to let users know
about this?
Good idea. Consider it done yesterday.
--
David
41 matches
Mail list logo
