On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 06:39:30PM +, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
> I think that wrapping a variable declaration in a code declaration is
> undesirable. It complicates the format of the documentation, for very
> little benefit (if any).
>
> If we want to change the format of @var{} in HT
On 2010/10/26 08:21:41, Mark Polesky wrote:
Well... Okay, yeah, but see this:
http://kainhofer.com/%7Elilypond/Documentation/contributor/syntax-survey.html#miscellany
I'm the one that wrote the @var description there. And yes,
the rationale is simplistic: "This improves readability in
the P
> I'm the one that wrote the @var description there. And yes, the
> rationale is simplistic: "This improves readability in the PDF and
> HTML output."
Does it? It's not clear to me why the formatting of A.17 looks better
if using typewriter in upright and italic shapes. It's really a
matter of
On 2010/10/26 05:52:08, wl_gnu.org wrote:
Well, have a look at section A.17 (Scheme functions) and
see how function names and arguments are formatted. Mark
is referring to code blocks which contain metasyntactical
variables. However, for your function (which is
eventually appearing in A.17 too)
>> Don't say @co...@var{...}} but @var{...}.
>
> Hmm, have I misinterpreted Mark's post here?:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-09/msg00285.html
Well, have a look at section A.17 (Scheme functions) and see how
function names and arguments are formatted. Mark is referri
On 2010/10/25 06:03:36, lemzwerg wrote:
Don't say @co...@var{...}} but @var{...}.
Hmm, have I misinterpreted Mark's post here?:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-09/msg00285.html
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/
___
lilyp
LGTM too.
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/diff/18001/lily/stencil-scheme.cc
File lily/stencil-scheme.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/diff/18001/lily/stencil-scheme.cc#newcode398
lily/stencil-scheme.cc:398: {
Don't say @co...@var{...}} but @var{...}.
http://codereview.ap
LGTM.
Thanks,
Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 2010/10/08 05:32:32, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Looks great!
Thanks.
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/diff/2001/input/regression/stencil-scale.ly
File input/regression/stencil-scale.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/diff/2001/input/regression/stencil-scale.ly#newcode2
Reviewers: Valentin Villenave, Patrick McCarty,
Message:
On 2010/10/04 10:36:47, Valentin Villenave wrote:
Hi Neil, your patch looks awesome!
Thanks.
Wouldn't a number-pair be more consistent with existing markup
commands such as
translate-scaled?
Yep, and it saves a hash too. :)
Cheer
Hi Neil,
Looks great!
I just have a couple of comments for you (below).
Thanks,
Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/diff/2001/input/regression/stencil-scale.ly
File input/regression/stencil-scale.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/diff/2001/input/regression/stencil-s
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/diff/2001/scm/define-markup-commands.scm
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/diff/2001/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#newcode3375
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:3375: (number? number? markup?)
Hi Neil, your patc
12 matches
Mail list logo
