Hey all,
I'm trying to design a regtest for the DOM-id property. Ideally, I'd
like to generate an svg file that is then checked by a python script to
make sure that the property has been correctly set.
I have sketches of the files in question (see attached) and I'm
wondering how I could
Reviewers: J_lowe, carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com, lemzwerg, MikeSol,
Message:
On 2012/01/10 06:29:57, lemzwerg wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/5527058/diff/1/python/convertrules.py
File python/convertrules.py (right):
On 2012/01/09 20:42:30, J_lowe wrote:
Does this do anything to the
\auto-footnote
command as well?
No.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5527058/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
On 2012/01/10 07:08:29, MikeSol wrote:
LGTM. Good work!
The only think I'd ask is that you change the markup syntax before
pushing the
patch. I think that, if the distinction between footnote and
auto-footnote is
going to be eliminated, it needs to be categorical.
Optional arguments
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 11:07:35 -, Phil Holmes wrote:
A large number of changes in tests with slurs: see
lyric-extender-completion.png for example. Assume these are Mike's
changes to make slur bounding boxes lass rectangular.
Are there any changes that result in collisions? The gamble
- Original Message -
From: m...@apollinemike.com
To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 12:08 PM
Subject: Re: Regtests for 2.15.24
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 11:07:35 -, Phil Holmes wrote:
A large number of changes in tests with slurs: see
LGTM.
From a lazy user's POV, I don't like that I now have to use \default for
auto-numbering (which is th typical case)...
But then, one can always define one's own music function that takes care
of that. So no objection from my side.
On 2012/01/10 12:59:21, Reinhold wrote:
LGTM.
From a lazy user's POV, I don't like that I now have to use \default
for
auto-numbering (which is th typical case)...
It is the same as with \mark (we don't have \autoMark either). One
might consider moving the footnote mark argument to last
On 2012/01/10 13:18:03, dak wrote:
On 2012/01/10 12:59:21, Reinhold wrote:
LGTM.
From a lazy user's POV, I don't like that I now have to use \default
for
auto-numbering (which is th typical case)...
It is the same as with \mark (we don't have \autoMark either). One
might
consider
Checking the file timestamps will be a good thing. It might be better to
just replace the whole www_post script by make rules, but in the current
implementation this is a good improvement.
Just a style thing, in general I notice that you use function(arg)
while the rest of python source code in
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:28:46 +, d...@gnu.org wrote:
On 2012/01/10 13:18:03, dak wrote:
On 2012/01/10 12:59:21, Reinhold wrote:
LGTM.
From a lazy user's POV, I don't like that I now have to use
\default
for
auto-numbering (which is th typical case)...
It is the same as with \mark
m...@apollinemike.com writes:
Actually, one could juggle the order of arguments around such that
the optional arguments can't be confused with the next argument.
Like putting the footnote mark first, position next, Grob spec next,
footnote text last. In that manner, you could leave off
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
Well, scanning for \markup ... will be quite more of a challenge.
Another problem I see is coordinating the change with the equally-named
\footnote markup command. I have to see how that is defined.
On the plus side, most user files will likely be using
Hi you all,
i'm a (typo)graphic designer from Italy and i'm about to finish my dissertation
about typography inside musical notation.
I would like to apply my result inside lilypond like it was for the gonville
font ( http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ ).
The problem is that
On Jan 10, 2012, at 3:23 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
Well, scanning for \markup ... will be quite more of a challenge.
Another problem I see is coordinating the change with the equally-named
\footnote markup command. I have to see how that is defined.
On
m...@apollinemike.com m...@apollinemike.com writes:
On Jan 10, 2012, at 3:23 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
What's that? auto-numbering will only be active if
footnote-auto-numbering is set in the layout? Which it isn't by
default? And where there is no documentation around explaining how and
On Jan 10, 2012, at 4:46 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
m...@apollinemike.com m...@apollinemike.com writes:
On Jan 10, 2012, at 3:23 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
What's that? auto-numbering will only be active if
footnote-auto-numbering is set in the layout? Which it isn't by
default? And
m...@apollinemike.com m...@apollinemike.com writes:
On Jan 10, 2012, at 4:46 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
footnote-auto-numbering is present in the _code_. This is not just a
question of the doc string. There _is_ user-level documentation in
the notation manual (as a warning) mentioning,
Hi Pavel,
2012/1/9 Pavel Roskin pro...@gnu.org:
Comparing scanned data to internal numbers is not a fair comparison.
When scanning, the lines can get blurred and then they are converted to
black-and-white based on the darkness settings. Lines can get thicker
or thinner.
The most fair
According to suggestions, narrow natural was made a bit wider.
New example files attached to tracker issue
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2203
http://codereview.appspot.com/5527049/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Remove the use of absolute paths in lilypond-book.
Please review.
Description:
Fix .dep file from lilypond-book when include paths are involved.
Don't rewrite include paths; use relative paths whenever possible.
Similar to
http://codereview.appspot.com/5520056/diff/1/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely
File Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5520056/diff/1/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode1350
Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:1350: partial measure
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Please review.
Description:
Use forward slashes as path separators in latex (issue 2209).
Please review this at http://codereview.appspot.com/5530069/
Affected files:
M python/book_latex.py
Index: python/book_latex.py
diff --git a/python/book_latex.py
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Please review.
Description:
Build: Top-level GNUmakefile
This file is chmoded to 444 so it cannot be overwritten by
cat EOF GNUmakefile
alone; it needs to be removed first. It also has some missing
dependencies as evidenced by running `make' twice: on the second
run it
For Thursday, January 12th, 2012
Documentation:
Issue 2198
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2198: Document use
of PATH statement in Windows - R 5521056
http://codereview.appspot.com/5521056/
Enhancement:
Issue 2206
The following Tracker items have not been modified for over a month.
Would the owners please have a look, and update the status: either
patch-abandoned and close the related Rietveld issue, or patch
needs-work with a comment if that is appropriate.
*ID**Type* *Owner* *Summary*
http://codereview.appspot.com/5530069/diff/1/python/book_latex.py
File python/book_latex.py (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5530069/diff/1/python/book_latex.py#newcode274
python/book_latex.py:274: rep['base'] = basename.replace ('\\', '/')
hmm, isn't there anything in os.path that could
pushed to staging and closed.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5503093/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Begin LilyPond compile, commit: ee12a32549ed3802251669b9ad511141fda7b9a0
Merged staging, now at: b70e6aaf640755d503add64bec847126761bc8c0
Success:./autogen.sh --noconfigure
Success:../configure --disable-optimising
*** FAILED BUILD ***
There are some duplications in the docs now.
(LBTM?)
http://codereview.appspot.com/5527058/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5527058/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1053
http://codereview.appspot.com/4951062/diff/91002/input/regression/note-head-style.ly
File input/regression/note-head-style.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4951062/diff/91002/input/regression/note-head-style.ly#newcode101
input/regression/note-head-style.ly:101:
add break here
this fails to compile. Removed from staging.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5503093/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
/1/11 lilypond.patchy.gra...@gmail.com:
*** FAILED BUILD ***
nice make -j3 CPU_COUNT=3
Previous good commit: ee12a32549ed3802251669b9ad511141fda7b9a0
Current broken commit: b70e6aaf640755d503add64bec847126761bc8c0
Looks like mine, sorry...
and indeed, make fails
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 06:52:38AM +0100, Janek Warchoł wrote:
I guess i don't know how to write curly braces in texinfo. Should it be
@example
PATH=~/type-here-directory-containing-git-cl:$\{PATH\}
@end example
escape with @
i.e. @{PATH@}
this is in the CG.
How do i proceed? I
ok, I'm really confused with all the reports about what happens on
all sorts of different lilypond versions.
Please test this version:
http://lilypond.org/~graham/lilypond-2.15.25-1.mingw.exe
add it to your PATH, then me exactly what you see when you try to
call lilypond-book. I have various
Graham,
2012/1/11 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
Please test this version:
http://lilypond.org/~graham/lilypond-2.15.25-1.mingw.exe
add it to your PATH, then me exactly what you see when you try to
call lilypond-book.
This might be a stupid question, but i never used lilypond-book
On 2012/01/11 05:11:39, janek wrote:
There are some duplications in the docs now.
(LBTM?)
The notation manual has not been revised yet.
Since I am currently doing the convert-ly rules for juggling the
argument order and this will, obviously, also affect the manual both
with respect to
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 07:28:18AM +0100, Janek Warchoł wrote:
This might be a stupid question, but i never used lilypond-book
before: should i call it without any input file? If no, can you
provide example input?
Read the Usage manual. Specifically the lilypond-book chapter.
- Graham
http://codereview.appspot.com/5503093/diff/4003/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi
File Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5503093/diff/4003/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi#newcode926
On Jan 11, 2012, at 3:54 AM, Colin Campbell wrote:
The following Tracker items have not been modified for over a month. Would
the owners please have a look, and update the status: either
patch-abandoned and close the related Rietveld issue, or patch needs-work
with a comment if that is
- Original Message -
From: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com
To: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca
Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org; Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 6:28 AM
Subject: Re: lilypond-book on windows
Graham,
2012/1/11 Graham
41 matches
Mail list logo
