On 2016/12/26 19:14:00, pkx166h wrote:
On 2016/12/25 21:53:55, akobel wrote:
> Bottom line: I withdraw both proposals.
Can you then re-submit a new patch or delete the one(s) that are
invalid?
Sorry, I'm a bit drawn up between my position as the Rietveld-proxy of
Knut and my own Alexander-ro
On 2016/12/25 15:43:05, Knut_Petersen_t-online.de wrote:
Hi everybody!
> I'm only 90% happy about "" and \markup\null...
> For dynamic spanners and hairpins, we have \! to end them
prematurely
> before a "natural" end event appears. Is this similar enough to
warrant
> the use of the same
https://codereview.appspot.com/313240043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely
File Documentation/notation/vocal.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/313240043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely#newcode842
Documentation/notation/vocal.itely:842: @samp{ \markup\null }
Reviewers: ,
Message:
For the sake of completeness: deserves an entry in changes.tely (TBD
when the syntax discussion is over that I expect to start some time
soon...)
Description:
Automatic LyricExtenders
As written and communicated by Knut Peterson.
For reference, see the threads
http://lis
New patch set is online that includes an entry in changes.tely and
changes the wording of the two places in question.
Cheers,
Alexander
https://codereview.appspot.com/311430043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu
Reviewers: ,
Message:
add choral and choral-cautionary accidental style
This solves the issues mentioned in
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-12/msg00201.html
that accidental style could not apply to ChoirStaves in the same way as
they did for PianoStaves, StaffGroups or Gr
On 2014/07/31 20:40:40, janek wrote:
from description:
> Furthermore, it implements per-font scaling (e.g., to match the
x-heights
> of different fonts used in the document).
This is very nice! Please pardon a stupid question, but i failed to
find which
place in the code is responsible fo
On 2014/07/17 09:13:54, dak wrote:
mailto:perpeduumimmob...@gmail.com writes:
> That leaves me with only one more question: Is there any reason to
use
> Texinfo markup in those docstrings, given that all more-or-less
obvious
> ways of accessing it do not seem to use it? Or should I rather
On 2014/07/17 08:28:36, dak wrote:
mailto:perpeduumimmob...@gmail.com writes:
> Two follow-up questions:
> 1.) Is there a way to list all Lily scheme functions and/or all
their
> docstrings? If you know what function or variable you are looking
for,
> the docstrings are obviously great.
On 2014/07/17 06:36:20, dak wrote:
mailto:perpeduumimmob...@gmail.com writes:
> On 2014/07/16 17:13:27, J_lowe wrote:
>> > On 2014/07/16 09:20:45, dak wrote:
>> >> There is no doc string here or other documentation.
>> >
>> > I wrote one now; didn't do it because I started with a copy of
>>
>>
On 2014/07/16 17:13:27, J_lowe wrote:
> On 2014/07/16 09:20:45, dak wrote:
>> There is no doc string here or other documentation.
>
> I wrote one now; didn't do it because I started with a copy of
> make-pango-font-tree, and it does not have one as well (I know, not
the
> best reason).
> Is the
https://codereview.appspot.com/108700043/diff/20001/scm/font.scm
File scm/font.scm (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/108700043/diff/20001/scm/font.scm#newcode240
scm/font.scm:240: (define-public (make-expert-font-tree fonts-alist
factor)
On 2014/07/16 09:20:45, dak wrote:
There is no doc
On 2010/11/19 07:55:46, Patrick McCarty wrote:
IIUC, this would not be a straightforward conversion that regular
expressions can (easily) deal with. I would suggest a NOT SMART
rule that recommends the use of the new spacing alists.
I second this. It would be possible to convert the *-separat
On 2010/11/14 06:59:41, Mark Polesky wrote:
On 2010/11/13 17:33:47, Graham Percival wrote:
> This patch cannot be applied to current master. [...]
I don't want to be a spoilsport, but I have a patch of my
own that I'm pretty sure takes care of everything involved
here (and more): http://codere
e @code
On 2010/10/02 09:17:16, perpeduumimmobile wrote:
> Hm. As long as vertical spacing is not absolutely
> bullet-proof specified, I don't like to see this
> sections deleted. [...]
Are you saying you'd prefer to define the four keys individually
for each of the eight variab
On 2010/09/10 19:46:57, Graham Percival wrote:
a python guru / regex person [...]
That's not me...
(from the issue description)
- Given a "define blah {" line, we *don't* want to move the { to
the next line.
- given a:
=
include "foo.h"
;
don't move the include onto the
On 2010/07/01 22:27:42, Neil Puttock wrote:
Hi Alexander,
LGTM.
Thanks.
It just needs some regression tests; the examples from #1116 and #382
should
suffice.
I did not write those - I'm not yet perfectly convinced that the
handling of word-space is the right thing to do (see below).
h
Reviewers: joeneeman, Neil Puttock,
Message:
On 2010/06/30 18:34:35, joeneeman wrote:
Are you still waiting for someone to review this?
Sorry, missed the notifications - I don't usually check my gmail
account.
http://codereview.appspot.com/1689041/diff/2001/3001#newcode848
scm/define-markup-
18 matches
Mail list logo
