Re: do we want special versions of the accidentals for use with text?

> I think the solution is to create a shorter variaton of accidental > glyphs; an example in the attachment. How do you like this idea? > Do you think all accidentals should have shorter versions, or would > it be overkill to create for example a shorter version of 3-stemmed > sharp or arrowed fl

PATCH: 48-hour countdown to 20110914

For 22:00 MDT Wednesday, September 14 Issue 456 : \laissezVibrer in chords - R 4969069 Issue 1876 : MusicXML: fix case when some elements

change longas similarly to how breves were changed (issue 4962072)

Reviewers: Bertrand Bordage, Message: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1883 Description: change longas similarly to how breves were changed Put vertical lines farther apart, make them longer to increase readability and include them in X-extent. Please review this at http://co

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

Graham Percival writes: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:20:47AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> Graham Percival writes: >> >> > But this is *not* appropriate for the >> > tutorial. I will be very unhappy if you put it there. >> >> It already went in with the last batch of patches > > I am very un

Re: include lines in breve X-extent (issue 1814) (issue 4986042)

On 2011/09/12 22:54:44, J_lowe wrote: Passes make and I get a few reg test differences. Thanks. They are all expected. Pushed as a1ce4a26eb893c1f752d260394a977ab811e3368 cheers, Janek http://codereview.appspot.com/4986042/ ___ lilypond-devel maili

Re: include lines in breve X-extent (issue 1814) (issue 4986042)

Passes make and I get a few reg test differences. See http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1814#c10 for attachments, http://codereview.appspot.com/4986042/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/ma

in what unit is shift_amount measured? (preparing fix for 1546)

Hi, i'm pretty confused about how note columns shift is measured (line 277 and following in note-collision.cc). I tried modifying the values there, but the results were quite unexpected; i tried to trace in what unit is shift_amount measured but to no avail. Could you enlighten me? (my idea to f

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:20:47AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > > > But this is *not* appropriate for the > > tutorial. I will be very unhappy if you put it there. > > It already went in with the last batch of patches I am very unhappy. > > Trust me. The tutorial s

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

2011/9/13 David Kastrup : > Graham Percival writes: > >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 04:18:38PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >>> Graham Percival writes: >>> >>> > I'm reluctant to add the suggestion of \relative f' {  to the >>> > tutorial since all the examples are variants of c. >>> >>> Personally,

do we want special versions of the accidentals for use with text?

Hi, I've noticed that accidental glyphs don't mix well with text: their baseline is incorrect, and their size doesn't match the letters. Look at the chordnames resulting from input below: the accidentals are too big. If they were of correct height, they would become too thin and generally too sm

Re: New engraver for braces (issue 4807053)

2011/9/13 : > On 2011/09/12 21:35:03, janek wrote: >> >> can you tell me what needs work in this patch?  I've read Mike's > > comments, but i >> >> don't understand what should be done. > > This patch contains many copy/paste from the arpeggio engraver. We > obviously need a new grob, since the br

Re: Improves some parmesan noteheads. (issue 4639065)

Hi, i've looked at latest screenshot attached to tracker issue and... wow! It looks really great! I have only small suggestions about some sizes. You've put a lot of work into this! thanks, Janek http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/13002/ly/engraver-init.ly File ly/engraver-init.ly (rig

Re: Improves some parmesan noteheads. (issue 4639065)

Thanks for your reviews! On 2011/09/12 19:16:26, benko.pal wrote: http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/13002/lily/mensural-ligature.cc#newcode147 lily/mensural-ligature.cc:147: Direction stem_dir = stem ? get_grob_direction (stem) : CENTER; this is unneeded: there are no stemmed notes w

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

Graham Percival writes: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 04:18:38PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> Graham Percival writes: >> >> > I'm reluctant to add the suggestion of \relative f' { to the >> > tutorial since all the examples are variants of c. >> >> Personally, I don't think \relative f' is all

Re: New engraver for braces (issue 4807053)

On 2011/09/12 21:35:03, janek wrote: can you tell me what needs work in this patch? I've read Mike's comments, but i don't understand what should be done. This patch contains many copy/paste from the arpeggio engraver. We obviously need a new grob, since the braces need some special grob par

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 04:18:38PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > > > I'm reluctant to add the suggestion of \relative f' { to the > > tutorial since all the examples are variants of c. > > Personally, I don't think \relative f' is all that interesting. The > really id

Re: New engraver for braces (issue 4807053)

Hi Bertrand, can you tell me what needs work in this patch? I've read Mike's comments, but i don't understand what should be done. I have a strong feeling that it should be patch-review. It's a nice work and i'd like to see it implemented. cheers, Janek http://codereview.appspot.com/4807053/

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

2011/9/12 Trevor Daniels : > David Kastrup wrote Monday, September 12, 2011 3:18 PM > >> I'd propose something like >> >> +If you carefully consider all the rules above and remember that the >> +octave of absolute pitches also is specified disregarding any >> +accidentals, one rather interesting co

Re: Add some polyphonically directed grobs (issue 4387046)

On 2011/09/06 16:42:34, Bertrand Bordage wrote: Ok, DynamicText and DynamicLineSpanner should be removed. But what about the others? I think they should be added. cheers, Janek http://codereview.appspot.com/4387046/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list

Re: parser.yy et al: turn \partial and \skip into music functions. (issue 4969076)

Pushed as 12449405eb89bb45d49d3dd3a37bdfcebda3ceaa. http://codereview.appspot.com/4969076/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: How to add measure counters?

On 12 September 2011 20:45, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > Exactly, that was my idea. My problem is that I can't do it like in the > percent repeat case, where we have percent-repeat-events (generated in the > iterator), which start at the right moment and have the correct length. In the > measure c

Re: How to add measure counters?

Am Monday, 12. September 2011, 21:14:11 schrieb Neil Puttock: > On 12 September 2011 20:03, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > > Any idea how to implement this? > > Shouldn't it just be a spanner whose bounds are the left column and > right column for each bar? Similar to a full-bar rest or percent >

Re: Improves some parmesan noteheads. (issue 4639065)

there are problems: the patch as is fails the mensural-ligatures regtest. see below. p http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/13002/lily/mensural-ligature.cc File lily/mensural-ligature.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/13002/lily/mensural-ligature.cc#newcode147 lily/

Re: How to add measure counters?

On 12 September 2011 20:03, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > Any idea how to implement this? Shouldn't it just be a spanner whose bounds are the left column and right column for each bar? Similar to a full-bar rest or percent repeat. Cheers, Neil ___ lil

How to add measure counters?

I'm currently investigating how to implement measure counters (Bug 146): http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=146 Compared to multi-measure rest numbers and to percent repeat numbers, there is a little complication: There is no grob to attach the numbers to (the percent repeat iter

Re: parser.yy et al: turn \partial and \skip into music functions. (issue 4969076)

bordage.bertr...@gmail.com writes: > LGTM. > Is there any way to also move \time, \key, \repeat and \alternative > from the parser? \time has a weird syntax with optional assignment \key can take a \default argument \repeat only takes an _optional_ \alternative So no. I am not sure about other

Re: parser.yy et al: turn \partial and \skip into music functions. (issue 4969076)

LGTM. Is there any way to also move \time, \key, \repeat and \alternative from the parser? Bertrand http://codereview.appspot.com/4969076/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Finding commits

- Original Message - From: "Phil Holmes" To: "Patrick McCarty" Cc: "Devel" Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 8:51 AM Subject: Re: Finding commits - Original Message - From: "Patrick McCarty" To: "Phil Holmes" Cc: "Devel" Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 1:31 AM Subject: R

Re: Working on Issue 1135

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 04:40:42PM +0200, Marc Hohl wrote: > They appear both in E and F - before the patch, they were listed in F only. > Is this ok? Then the attached patch is probably ready to push. thanks, pushed. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-deve

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

David Kastrup wrote Monday, September 12, 2011 3:18 PM I'd propose something like +If you carefully consider all the rules above and remember that the +octave of absolute pitches also is specified disregarding any +accidentals, one rather interesting consequence is that the first note +in @c

Re: Working on Issue 1135

Am 12.09.2011 15:33, schrieb Graham Percival: On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 02:32:56PM +0200, Marc Hohl wrote: ok, but does that mean that issue 1135 can be closed? As mentioned elsewhere, I replaced @findex by @funindex in scm/document-identifiers.scm but this seems to change nothing ... That shou

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

Graham Percival writes: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:44:33AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> Now I don't like having two different syntaxes for \relative, >> but I guess Graham would kill me if I proposed just leaving >> \relative { ... } in place with a new meaning. > > Yeah, that's so not happen

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:44:33AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Now I don't like having two different syntaxes for \relative, > but I guess Graham would kill me if I proposed just leaving > \relative { ... } in place with a new meaning. Yeah, that's so not happening. Come up with a different nam

Re: Working on Issue 1135

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 02:32:56PM +0200, Marc Hohl wrote: > ok, but does that mean that issue 1135 can be closed? > As mentioned elsewhere, I replaced @findex by @funindex in > > scm/document-identifiers.scm > > but this seems to change nothing ... That should make the functions appear in both

Re: Improves some parmesan noteheads. (issue 4639065)

LGTM Werner http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 2.15.10 regtests

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 08:53:01AM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: > I know (I think..) James now does the regtest comparison for every > patch. He does not. And even if he did, he would be comparing the individual effects of each individual patch, not the total effect of them all. It's not impossibl

Re: Working on Issue 1135

On 12 September 2011 13:47, Marc Hohl wrote: > I created a new directory, made a git repository from scratch, > changed the one line and did > > make all > make doc Hmm, in that case, I'm not sure why it doesn't work. I assume you changed the offending line to this: @funindex \\~a Cheers, Nei

Re: Working on Issue 1135

Neil Puttock writes: > On 12 September 2011 13:49, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Not as long as I have not checked and pushed appropriate changes. > > I don't see how that's relevant. You've broken the way the argument > list is documented for each function. That has no bearing on the way > music

Re: Working on Issue 1135

On 12 September 2011 13:49, David Kastrup wrote: > Not as long as I have not checked and pushed appropriate changes. I don't see how that's relevant. You've broken the way the argument list is documented for each function. That has no bearing on the way music functions are indexed. Cheers, Ne

Re: Working on Issue 1135

Neil Puttock writes: > On 12 September 2011 13:32, Marc Hohl wrote: > >> ok, but does that mean that issue 1135 can be closed? >> As mentioned elsewhere, I replaced @findex by @funindex in >> >> scm/document-identifiers.scm >> >> but this seems to change nothing ... > > Did you ensure it's rebui

Re: Working on Issue 1135

Am 12.09.2011 14:41, schrieb Neil Puttock: On 12 September 2011 13:32, Marc Hohl wrote: ok, but does that mean that issue 1135 can be closed? As mentioned elsewhere, I replaced @findex by @funindex in scm/document-identifiers.scm but this seems to change nothing ... Did you ensure it's rebu

Re: Working on Issue 1135

On 12 September 2011 13:32, Marc Hohl wrote: > ok, but does that mean that issue 1135 can be closed? > As mentioned elsewhere, I replaced @findex by @funindex in > > scm/document-identifiers.scm > > but this seems to change nothing ... Did you ensure it's rebuilt properly? IIUC you need to touc

Re: Working on Issue 1135

Am 12.09.2011 12:59, schrieb David Kastrup: Janek Warchoł writes: 2011/9/12 Marc Hohl: Am 11.09.2011 22:35, schrieb Janek Warchoł: [...] The only thing that comes to my mind is that some settings from the previous configuration of make (when there was no separate build/) slipped to the curre

Re: Working on Issue 1135

Am 12.09.2011 12:56, schrieb Neil Puttock: 2011/9/12 Janek Warchoł: 2011/9/12 Marc Hohl: Do I understand issue 1135 right - the scheme functions should get listed on out-www/offline-root/Documentation/internals/scheme-functions.html? Or am I searching on the wrong place? I'm not the one who c

Re: Doc: Added \compoundMeter function to NR (issue 4837050)

LGTM. http://codereview.appspot.com/4837050/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Working on Issue 1135

Janek Warchoł writes: > 2011/9/12 Marc Hohl : >> Am 11.09.2011 22:35, schrieb Janek Warchoł: >>> >>> [...] >>> The only thing that comes to my mind is that some settings from the >>> previous configuration of make (when there was no separate build/) >>> slipped to the current configuration.  The

parser.yy et al: turn \partial and \skip into music functions. (issue 4969076)

LGTM. http://codereview.appspot.com/4969076/diff/1/ly/music-functions-init.ly File ly/music-functions-init.ly (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4969076/diff/1/ly/music-functions-init.ly#newcode794 ly/music-functions-init.ly:794: "Make a partial measure." (_i "Make a partial measure.") ind

Re: Working on Issue 1135

2011/9/12 Janek Warchoł : > 2011/9/12 Marc Hohl : >> Do I understand issue 1135 right - the scheme functions should get listed >> on out-www/offline-root/Documentation/internals/scheme-functions.html? >> >> Or am I searching on the wrong place? > > I'm not the one who can answer this question :( >

Re: Working on Issue 1135

2011/9/12 Marc Hohl : > Am 11.09.2011 22:35, schrieb Janek Warchoł: >> >> [...] >> The only thing that comes to my mind is that some settings from the >> previous configuration of make (when there was no separate build/) >> slipped to the current configuration.  The only way that i know to >> solve

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

Reinhold Kainhofer writes: > Am Monday, 12. September 2011, 12:01:53 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Actually, I noticed just now that built-in music functions are >> documented in lilypond-notation, and of course all of my work on music >> functions has resulted in borking this documentation. > > The

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

Am Monday, 12. September 2011, 12:01:53 schrieb David Kastrup: > Actually, I noticed just now that built-in music functions are > documented in lilypond-notation, and of course all of my work on music > functions has resulted in borking this documentation. The documentation is extracted from the m

Re: regtests about very small differencies

Am Monday, 12. September 2011, 12:01:25 schrieb Janek Warchoł: > Hi all, > > I'm going to fix an issue where a note is misplaced by about 0.07 > staffspace. I'll add a regtest for this, but how will we make sure > that it won't be overlooked in the future? When we watch a regtest > comparison, i

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

Benkő Pál writes: \relative x??? { x Namely start with the starting pitch. >>> >>> my two cents: I always do that. >> >> And my two cents: I never do that. >> My rationale: in an (admittedly quite rare) case i want to paste the >> contents of one relative to another relative, having var

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

> Seems like I am starting the wrong popular revolution.  I ask "Isn't > \relative f nice?" and people say "Sure, but let's call it \relative { } > instead, never mind that the name is taken." > You are the second in a row, and if I understand "Basso Profundo" > correctly (he has not followed up y

regtests about very small differencies

Hi all, I'm going to fix an issue where a note is misplaced by about 0.07 staffspace. I'll add a regtest for this, but how will we make sure that it won't be overlooked in the future? When we watch a regtest comparison, it shows us the output in a quite low-resolution rasterized form; it will be

Re: Finding commits

Am Monday, 12. September 2011, 02:31:46 schrieb Patrick McCarty: > On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Phil Holmes wrote: > > To verify that a "patch" Issue has been fixed, we check the commit. > > Using the git web interface, is there a way to find the commit from the > > commitish? I've tried but

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

Benkő Pál writes: \relative x??? { x Namely start with the starting pitch. >>> >>> my two cents: I always do that. >> >> Would you be tempted to use either >> a) \relative f { x??? >> b) \relative f??? { x >> (and which one?) if you realized it worked just the same? > > well, b) is near

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

>>> \relative x??? { x >>> Namely start with the starting pitch. >> >> my two cents: I always do that. > > And my two cents: I never do that. > My rationale: in an (admittedly quite rare) case i want to paste the > contents of one relative to another relative, having various starting > pitches forc

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

2011/9/12 Benkő Pál : >> \relative x??? { x >> Namely start with the starting pitch. > > my two cents: I always do that. And my two cents: I never do that. My rationale: in an (admittedly quite rare) case i want to paste the contents of one relative to another relative, having various starting pit

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

>>> \relative x??? { x >>> Namely start with the starting pitch. >> >> my two cents: I always do that. > > Would you be tempted to use either > a) \relative f { x??? > b) \relative f??? { x > (and which one?) if you realized it worked just the same? well, b) is nearer to my current idiom; I can se

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

Benkő Pál writes: >> \relative x??? { x >> Namely start with the starting pitch. > > my two cents: I always do that. Would you be tempted to use either a) \relative f { x??? b) \relative f??? { x (and which one?) if you realized it worked just the same? I know Graham could not be tempted as he

Re: A few remarks concerning \relative

> \relative x??? { x > Namely start with the starting pitch. my two cents: I always do that. p ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 2.15.10 regtests

- Original Message - From: "Graham Percival" To: "Phil Holmes" Cc: "Devel" Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 5:44 PM Subject: Re: 2.15.10 regtests On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 04:06:14PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: Same problem as 2.15.9 - I think the change of spacing from the clef to the

Re: Finding commits

- Original Message - From: "Patrick McCarty" To: "Phil Holmes" Cc: "Devel" Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 1:31 AM Subject: Re: Finding commits On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Phil Holmes wrote: To verify that a "patch" Issue has been fixed, we check the commit. Using the git we

Re: 2.15.10 regtests

Phil Holmes philholmes.net> writes: > > Same problem as 2.15.9 - I think the change of spacing from the clef to the > first note means that almost every regtest is different. I looked through the 2.15.10 vs .9 comparison and recognized the cause of most changes Those I didn't recognize are