Re: Uses horizontal skylines in accidental placement (issue 6489086)

http://codereview.appspot.com/6489086/diff/11/lily/accidental-placement.cc File lily/accidental-placement.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6489086/diff/11/lily/accidental-placement.cc#newcode377 lily/accidental-placement.cc:377: Real offset = -ape->horizontal_skylines_[RIGHT].distance (

Doc: improve documentation of Bézier curves (2858) (issue 6561064)

Maybe just dump the waste of time that was \override 'control-points http://codereview.appspot.com/6561064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely File Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6561064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/ch

Re: Provide \hide and \omit functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048)

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:33 AM, wrote: >> what about using \no for turning stencil off? e.g. >> \new Voice \with { \no StringNumber } > > It is grammatically cuter in connection with \with, but that's actually > more a problem of \with than of \omit: every other command working on > properties i

Eliminate MARKUP_IDENTIFIER and MARKUPLIST_IDENTIFIER (issue 6561053)

The description looks really nice, but unfortunately i think i don't grasp the consequences of this change. Could you give some before/after input examples? Does this have anything to do with what you proposed in "[GLISS] turn xxx.yyy into ("xxx" "yyy")"? http://codereview.appspot.com/6561053/

Re: Uses horizontal skylines in accidental placement (issue 6489086)

Janek Warchoł writes: > There were three patchsets (maybe more). If it looks catastrophic, > I trust you - just revert it in staging and send me a short > example w/ the regression and I'll work on it. > > It looks to me that this patch is way past staging, so i'm not sure if > it mak

Re: Provide \hide and \omit functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048)

Reviewers: janek, Message: On 2012/09/28 05:18:42, janek wrote: sorry to join the discussion so late... what about using \no for turning stencil off? e.g. \new Voice \with { \no StringNumber } As for the code, it LGTM. It is grammatically cuter in connection with \with, but that's actual

Provide \hide and \omit functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048)

sorry to join the discussion so late... what about using \no for turning stencil off? e.g. \new Voice \with { \no StringNumber } As for the code, it LGTM. http://codereview.appspot.com/6575048/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org h

Re: Uses horizontal skylines in accidental placement (issue 6489086)

On Thursday, September 27, 2012, m...@mikesolomon.org wrote: > On 27 sept. 2012, at 13:56, Janek Warchoł > wrote: > > Um, Mike, i've just checked and current master has many cases of bad > > accidental placement - many accidentals are too close to each other. > > For example, . It looks pretty

Re: Issue 2717: Implement \single for converting overrides to tweaks (issue 6495135)

i don't feel competent to speak about scheme code, but the idea LGTM. http://codereview.appspot.com/6495135/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

PATCH: Countdown to 20120930

For 20:00 MDT (later if there's a Gospel Hymn Sing!) Sunday September 30 Enhancement: Issue 2717 : Implement \single for converting overrides to tweaks - R 6495135 Issue 2859

Re: bar-line interface part 2/2: New bar line definition standard (issue 6498052)

One tiny addition: http://codereview.appspot.com/6498052/diff/24001/scm/bar-line.scm File scm/bar-line.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6498052/diff/24001/scm/bar-line.scm#newcode1053 scm/bar-line.scm:1053: (define-bar-line ":|]" ":|]" #f " |") When we provide a bracket-repeat-sign

Re: bar-line interface part 2/2: New bar line definition standard (issue 6498052)

Apart from a typo in changes.tely (q.v.), LGTM. http://codereview.appspot.com/6498052/diff/24001/Documentation/changes.tely File Documentation/changes.tely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6498052/diff/24001/Documentation/changes.tely#newcode67 Documentation/changes.tely:67: as @code{:|}.

Patchy report

21:58:01 (UTC) Begin LilyPond compile, previous commit at 9de1c7467d9fceec1150156236b50bd7c668185a 21:58:23 Merged staging, now at:9de1c7467d9fceec1150156236b50bd7c668185a 21:58:27Success:sudo -u lilybuild ./autogen.sh --noconfigure 21:59:05Success:

Re: [talk] easy tuplets

On 27/09/12 21:06, m...@mikesolomon.org wrote: From my Suite Post Algorithmica. I stand corrected, and rather amused :-) ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Uses horizontal skylines in accidental placement (issue 6489086)

On 27 sept. 2012, at 13:56, Janek Warchoł wrote: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Janek Warchoł > wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 5:43 PM, m...@mikesolomon.org >> wrote: >>> OK - I'll be able to fix all the broken stuff on Monday or Tuesday. >> >> Whoah, this was pushed and i didn't notice

Re: [talk] easy tuplets

On 27/09/12 19:15, Ian Hulin wrote: It's slightly off-topic from Graham's original proposition in the thread base-message, which was restricted to multiple-of-two/multiples-of three type duplets. This part of the thread has strayed beyond extra valid values for durations, and we've strayed into

Re: [talk] easy tuplets

On 25/09/12 18:03, James wrote: PAH! I bet Mike Solo would eat Ferneyhough for breakfast If you mean Mike Solomon then yes, his scores engraved with Lilypond are mightily impressive. :-) ... but for the problem at hand -- in the scores I've seen, he doesn't use the complex nested tuplets o

Re: [talk] easy tuplets

Hi Joseph, On 25/09/12 16:43, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 24/09/12 18:27, David Kastrup wrote: >> I don't like it since it does not match musical concepts. You would not >> talk about "12th notes" to other musicians. > > That's not entirely true. Contemporary composers (I think Ferneyhou

Re: [GLISS] basics

On 27/09/12 16:44, Janek Warchoł wrote: oh yes, that's on my list of "difficult to express" things for more than a year. Reading Keith Stone's contemporary music examples, you'll see there's a similar issue for glissandi with a terminating pitch ... :-) _

Re: [GLISS] basics

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 26/09/12 09:19, Janek Warchoł wrote: >> >> This is a good idea in itself, but i'm afraid we'll drown in the flood >> of suggestions if we ask this question now. Currently we want to >> focus on syntax alone. > > I do understand

Re: Adds tick mark to scripts (issue 6568055)

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Phil Holmes wrote: > >> Horizontally, i would align the center of the bounding box to the "dip >> point". This would allow "visual centering" of the glyph on something. > > Can do. This would imply that there's empty space on the left of the glyph. > Is it OK to

Re: Uses horizontal skylines in accidental placement (issue 6489086)

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote: > On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 5:43 PM, m...@mikesolomon.org > wrote: >> OK - I'll be able to fix all the broken stuff on Monday or Tuesday. > > Whoah, this was pushed and i didn't notice anything... and regtests > that James posted are no longer av

Re: Adds tick mark to scripts (issue 6568055)

Please don't use `epsilon' in set_char_box. I think the problem is that you `sharpen' a coordinate distance by doing `define_pixels (y_off)', however, only `black distances' (to use the TrueType vocabulary) like vertical or horizontal stem widths should be handled like that. In general, I would

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 11:43 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > But why would we want it when writing \break? Where is the point in > "fixing" a problem by making a loosely related command act as a > workaround? Do you mean "we shouldn't need to write \bar "" to have \break work anywhere we want"? if

Re: [talk] easy tuplets

Benkő Pál writes: >> Well, "music argument after left-out optional argument" at the current >> point of time means "closed music". It is likely a safe bet that we >> rarely need a single note for a tuplet, so it is not much of a problem, >> and I am chugging away at getting the "closed music" th

Re: [talk] easy tuplets

> Well, "music argument after left-out optional argument" at the current > point of time means "closed music". It is likely a safe bet that we > rarely need a single note for a tuplet, so it is not much of a problem, > and I am chugging away at getting the "closed music" thing scrapped, but > that

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

Janek Warchoł writes: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 11:30 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> But I don't think we advertise \bar "" for anything except introducing >> optional breakpoints in the middle of a bar. Why would we want >> additional space then? The spacing of an optional breakpoint should not

Re: Adds tick mark to scripts (issue 6568055)

- Original Message - From: To: ; ; ; Cc: ; Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 10:11 AM Subject: Re: Adds tick mark to scripts (issue 6568055) Hi, thanks for including me in reviewers, Phil - i would probably miss it otherwise. The shape is ok. Personally i would make the right a

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 11:30 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > But I don't think we advertise \bar "" for anything except introducing > optional breakpoints in the middle of a bar. Why would we want > additional space then? The spacing of an optional breakpoint should not > be different from the spaci

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

Thomas Morley writes: > 2012/9/27 David Kastrup : > >> What do we need a zero width stencil for? > > Silly answer, to get the regtests correct. :) > > More serious, a zero width stencil will be considered during spacing. Yes, but what do we need that for? > Look at the output of the following 2

Re: Adds tick mark to scripts (issue 6568055)

Hi, thanks for including me in reviewers, Phil - i would probably miss it otherwise. The shape is ok. Personally i would make the right arm a tad thicker and a bit less curved, but that's only my opinion. As for the bounding box, i definitely think that it should be moved, both horizontally an

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

2012/9/27 Janek Warchoł : > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Marc Hohl wrote: >> I have to make a distinction between >> "" and '() in the new bar line interface. >> >> What do you think would be better: using a symbol instead of '(), >> so one can write >> >> \defineBarLine "|" "|" 'none "|" >> >

Re: Adds tick mark to scripts (issue 6568055)

http://codereview.appspot.com/6568055/diff/1/mf/feta-scripts.mf File mf/feta-scripts.mf (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6568055/diff/1/mf/feta-scripts.mf#newcode1774 mf/feta-scripts.mf:1774: set_char_box (0, 1.7 staff_space# + epsilon, Are you suggesting deleting the epsilon, or moving th

Re: Doc: Improve documentation of \glissando. (issue 6529043)

A new patch has been uploaded to a new issue, number 6567059, as I do not own this one. Werner: could you close this issue please. http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mail

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Marc Hohl wrote: > I have to make a distinction between > "" and '() in the new bar line interface. > > What do you think would be better: using a symbol instead of '(), > so one can write > > \defineBarLine "|" "|" 'none "|" > > or using #f instead: > > \defineBar

Re: Project - Eliminating grob parents and, outside-staff-priority

Mats Bengtsson writes: > On 09/27/2012 08:36 AM, lilypond-devel-requ...@gnu.org wrote: >>> A typical example of this is NoteCollision of N NoteColumns. The >>> >NoteColumns have to all move in a coordinated way, and the easiest way >>> >is to have a function (with local variables) that determines

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

Marc Hohl writes: > Am 27.09.2012 09:10, schrieb David Kastrup: >> >>> or finally defining an "empty stencil" glyph: >>> >>> \defineBarLine "|" "|" "x" "|" >>> >>> (note that "" is not the same as "x", as Harm explained; "" draws a >>> stencil with >>> zero width, "X" would draw *no* stencil at a

Re: [talk] easy tuplets

"Keith OHara" writes: > On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:51:43 -0700, Francisco Vila > wrote: > >> 2012/9/24 Janek Warchoł : >>> Seriously though, i think this syntax would be very useful for >>> algorithmic composers and computer programs manipulating Lily code. >>> Another advantage is code readability

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

Am 27.09.2012 09:10, schrieb David Kastrup: Marc Hohl writes: Am 26.09.2012 14:45, schrieb Thomas Morley: [...] Hi Marc, an idea, don't know if it's really helpful: >From 2.16.0-bar-line.scm, bar-glyph-alist: The old definition of bar "empty" was: ("empty" . (() . ())) The old definition o

Re: Project - Eliminating grob parents and, outside-staff-priority

On 09/27/2012 08:36 AM, lilypond-devel-requ...@gnu.org wrote: A typical example of this is NoteCollision of N NoteColumns. The >NoteColumns have to all move in a coordinated way, and the easiest way >is to have a function (with local variables) that determines what has >to happen. You might get

Re: Syntactical question [was: Re: Call for help with bar lines]

Marc Hohl writes: > Am 26.09.2012 14:45, schrieb Thomas Morley: >> [...] >> Hi Marc, >> >> an idea, don't know if it's really helpful: >> >> >From 2.16.0-bar-line.scm, bar-glyph-alist: >> The old definition of bar "empty" was: ("empty" . (() . ())) >> The old definition of bar "" was: ("" . (""