I'd be lying if I said I understood all this in detail, but I like the
big picture. If this passes regtests, I think that it's looking good.
One question -- as you move from parser tokens to music functions, is
the capability of displayLilyMusic being kept functional for all of
these functions?
On 2011/11/05 22:42:54, dak wrote:
On 2011/11/05 11:56:13, J_lowe wrote:
> Patch fails to apply against current master
Probably Rietveld did not like me deleting a patch in the middle of
the series.
It is really a noisome tool.
I don't think that Rietveld didn't like it. I think somebody
On 11/5/11 8:27 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote:
>Carl Sorensen writes:
>
>> New-odd-rhythm is odd as well (and it should be, because the rhythm is
>> odd -- with this type of syncopation the quaver should be broken up
>> into a hemidemisemiquaver (did I get this right) tied to a
>> double-dotted semi
Carl Sorensen writes:
> New-odd-rhythm is odd as well (and it should be, because the rhythm is
> odd -- with this type of syncopation the quaver should be broken up
> into a hemidemisemiquaver (did I get this right) tied to a
> double-dotted semiquaver, which would have a tie at the quaver
> boun
On Nov 5, 2011, at 4:11 PM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5323062/diff/29001/lily/pure-from-neighbor-engraver.cc#newcode49
> lily/pure-from-neighbor-engraver.cc:49: SCM pure_relevant_p =
> ly_lily_module_constant ("pure-relevant?");
> Now, this fills 'items_' with thin
As I've been working on fixing issue 11, I also ran across a request from
Sven
Axelsson to change the way beamlets are assigned automatically.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.general/66578
Or
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2011-09/msg00208.html
As I looked at th
>> Pure relevant is used all over the code.
>
> Good point. There is even a predicate 'pure-relevant?'
> defining which grobs qualify.
>
Exactly. This is how the Pure_from_neighbor_engraver
evaluates which grobs have
pure height functions (line 49).
http://codereview.appspot.com/5323062/d
"m...@apollinemike.com" writes:
> Hey all,
>
> I tried to compile Keith's version of Dvorak's 9th and I got a lot of:
>
> :2:55: error: syntax error, unexpected MUSIC_IDENTIFIER,
> expecting TONICNAME_PITCH or NOTENAME_PITCH or PITCH_IDENTIFIER
> \transposedCueDuring \lilyvartmpbg #lilyvart
This looks very nice.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5349043/diff/1005/lily/align-interface.cc
File lily/align-interface.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5349043/diff/1005/lily/align-interface.cc#newcode327
lily/align-interface.cc:327: vector translates = start == 0 && end
== INT_MAX
Th
On 2011/11/05 11:56:13, J_lowe wrote:
Patch fails to apply against current master
Probably Rietveld did not like me deleting a patch in the middle of the
series. It is really a noisome tool.
I'll delete and reupload the last version. That will hopefully help.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5
"m...@apollinemike.com" writes:
> On Nov 5, 2011, at 12:27 PM, Keith OHara wrote:
>
>>
>> I worry because you make the spacing given to bar lines rather
>> independent of the printed extent of bar lines, and the way you
>> calculate the space uses a part of LilyPond that I find hard to
>> unders
looks good! I never realized this case was such a bottleneck.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5349043/diff/1/lily/align-interface.cc
File lily/align-interface.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5349043/diff/1/lily/align-interface.cc#newcode320
lily/align-interface.cc:320: SCM l = SCM_EOL;
On Nov 5, 2011, at 12:27 PM, Keith OHara wrote:
>
> I worry because you make the spacing given to bar lines rather independent of
> the printed extent of bar lines, and the way you calculate the space uses a
> part of LilyPond that I find hard to understand.
It took me months to get my head ar
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 04:19:47 -0700, m...@apollinemike.com
wrote:
On Nov 4, 2011, at 2:35 PM, Keith OHara wrote:
The bug happens when the piece is entirely hight notes. (I should add some
intelligence to handle this case, so that we can use 'skyline-vertical-padding
without this annoyance.)
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> mts...@gmail.com wrote Saturday, November 05, 2011 3:45 PM
>
>
>> Just tried this out on a real score - the 4th movement of the Eroica on
>> mutopia.
>>
>> CURRENT MASTER
>>
>> real 4m30.352s
>> user 4m21.088s
>>
>> WITH PATCH
>>
>> real
mts...@gmail.com wrote Saturday, November 05, 2011 3:45 PM
Just tried this out on a real score - the 4th movement of the
Eroica on
mutopia.
CURRENT MASTER
real 4m30.352s
user 4m21.088s
WITH PATCH
real 2m4.457s
user 2m0.148s
w00t!
W00t indeed! That's some improvement!
(I don't know ho
Just tried this out on a real score - the 4th movement of the Eroica on
mutopia.
CURRENT MASTER
real4m30.352s
user4m21.088s
WITH PATCH
real2m4.457s
user2m0.148s
w00t!
http://codereview.appspot.com/5349043/
___
lilypond-devel mailin
Looks very good to me; a couple of minor changes suggested.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5320074/diff/14001/input/regression/chord-additional-pitch-prefix.ly
File input/regression/chord-additional-pitch-prefix.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5320074/diff/14001/input/regression/chord
Hey all,
I tried to compile Keith's version of Dvorak's 9th and I got a lot of:
:2:55: error: syntax error, unexpected MUSIC_IDENTIFIER, expecting
TONICNAME_PITCH or NOTENAME_PITCH or PITCH_IDENTIFIER
\transposedCueDuring \lilyvartmpbg #lilyvartmpbh
This is both before and after running
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Hey all,
A small patch to speed up LilyPond for large scores. Some benchmarks:
\version "2.15.17"
foo = \relative c'' {
\repeat unfold 1200 {
8-.^"foo"\pp^\espressivo\glissando[
( -.^"foo"\p^\espressivo )]
}
}
<<
\new Staff \foo
CURRENT MASTER
real0m36.
- Original Message -
From: "Adam Spiers"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: "Graham Percival" ;
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: Quick way to recreate docs
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
We decided that the "make" syntax served equally well, so I dropped
Hello,
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 2:01 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> So I was googling for yaffut to see what I could learn about it, and I
> found that ohloh has a rating system for the projects in its database.
>
> I looked up LilyPond, and found it:
>
> http://www.ohloh.net/p/lilypond
>
>
> The facto
Reviewers: J_lowe,
Message:
On 2011/11/05 11:54:16, J_lowe wrote:
Patch fails to apply to current master
Hardly surprising. This is why it says right at the top "This change is
on top of the dev/syntax branch still in review." and why its related
issue 2018 is blocked on issue 2001.
I'd appr
Patch fails to apply against current master
--snip--
jlowe@jlowe-lilybuntu2:~/lilypond-git$ patch -p1 <
../Desktop/issue5333051_6001.diff
patching file Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely
patching file input/regression/optional-args-backup.ly
Hunk #1 FAILED at 4.
1 out of 1 hunk
Patch fails to apply to current master
--snip--
jlowe@jlowe-lilybuntu2:~/lilypond-git$ patch -p1 <
../Desktop/issue5339043_1.diff
patching file lily/parser.yy
Hunk #1 succeeded at 426 (offset -38 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 460 (offset -46 lines).
Hunk #3 succeeded at 1221 with fuzz 2 (offset -
Passes make and no reg test diffs
http://codereview.appspot.com/5345046/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Passes Make and reg test diffs here
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1503#c27
James
http://codereview.appspot.com/5320074/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On Nov 4, 2011, at 2:35 PM, Keith OHara wrote:
> The bug happens when the piece is entirely hight notes. (I should add some
> intelligence to handle this case, so that we can use
> 'skyline-vertical-padding without this annoyance.) Any single protrusion
> below the staff anywhere in the piece
28 matches
Mail list logo
