https://codereview.appspot.com/363930043/diff/1/Documentation/GNUmakefile
File Documentation/GNUmakefile (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/363930043/diff/1/Documentation/GNUmakefile#newcode54
Documentation/GNUmakefile:54: TEXINFO_MANUALS_BUT_WEB = $(filter-out
web,$(TEXINFO_MANUALS))
LGTM
David Kastrup wrote:
> Huh. Maybe the Ubuntu compilation of gcc/g++ disabled some warnings?
>
> g++ --verbose
> Using built-in specs.
> COLLECT_GCC=g++
> COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8/lto-wrapper
> OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none
> OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1
> Target: x86_64-l
On February 21 2019 18:07 +, Trevor wrote:
> Added with Developer privileges. Welcome!
Thanks Trevor; at the end of the issue creation, an auto-generated
email bounced with
"""
Your mail to 'Testlilyissues-auto' with the subject
[testlilyissues:issues] #5482 Do not build PDFs from the web
John Mandereau writes:
> v.villen...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> page-turn-page-breaking.cc: In instantiation of 'bool is_break(T*)
>> [with
>> T = Grob]':
>> page-turn-page-breaking.cc:50:54: required from here
>> page-turn-page-breaking.cc:38:3: warning: operation on '*0' may be
>> undefined [-Wseq
v.villen...@gmail.com wrote:
> page-turn-page-breaking.cc: In instantiation of 'bool is_break(T*)
> [with
> T = Grob]':
> page-turn-page-breaking.cc:50:54: required from here
> page-turn-page-breaking.cc:38:3: warning: operation on '*0' may be
> undefined [-Wsequence-point]
> if (turnable
>
On 2/21/19, David Kastrup wrote:
> baba = -.4
Indeed. That’s probably rare enough that we could get away with a
@knownissues in the right place(s), though…
Right now, the new ability to have #-less numbers (and strings,
although my recent patch changes that) isn’t documented anywhere but
the git
John, you wrote 21/02/2019 17:19:23
Could somebody please add me (login john-mandereau) on SourceForge so I can
upload a patch using the expected workflow?
Added with Developer privileges. Welcome!
Trevor
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-dev
Le mer. 20 févr. 2019 à 00:26, John Mandereau a
écrit :
> It's certainly possible, it must boil down to filtering out web from
> TEXI_FILES or TEXINFO_MANUALS, and give this to PDF_FILES definition in
> the makefiles. I'm testing a patch for this.
>
Could somebody please add me (login john-mande
Valentin Villenave writes:
> Greetings,
>
> Alongside issue #5473, I’ve started investigating whether numbers
> still require to be prefixed with #.
In music, something like -.4 has entirely different meaning than in
layout blocks. To wit:
baba = -.4
\void \displayScheme #baba
\layout {
bub
Hi Valentin,
> Or, we just don’t bother and keep using (and recommending) # everywhere.
> Thoughts?
I use # everywhere I can, even where it’s not strictly necessary, in part
because it visibly sets arguments apart for easy parsing [by me].
Not sure if that’s useful input for you?
Best,
Kieren.
Greetings,
Alongside issue #5473, I’ve started investigating whether numbers
still require to be prefixed with #.
AFAICS, the only ones that still do are in markups and all markups
commands, but hardly anywhere else; which _could_ make LilyPond syntax
a tiny bit easier to grasp for new users…
Or w
11 matches
Mail list logo
