Hello,
Graham Percival wrote:
I think the always add explicit {} apart from ones that would
surround an entire example might the best way to go; if we
encounter any more exceptions to the always use them rule, we
can add them later.
This guideline has been added to the CG.
James
Hello,
Graham Percival wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
If you want to use the minumum number of { and indentation levels, you can
write
\context Voice \repeat unfold 2 \relative c' { c2 d }
or
\context Voice \repeat unfold 2 \relative c' {
c2
On 5/11/10 10:27 AM, James Lowe james.l...@datacore.com wrote:
Hello,
Graham Percival wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
If you want to use the minumum number of { and indentation levels, you can
write
\context Voice \repeat unfold 2
On 5/11/10 10:40 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
In the example above:
\context Voice \repeat unfold 2 \relative c' {c2 d},
\relative c' { c2 d } is a single music expression, so it doesn't need {}
around it to turn it into a sequence in order to work with \repeat unfold 2.
(sorry for the excessive quoting, but it's relevant)
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 05:27:02PM +0100, James Lowe wrote:
Graham Percival wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
If you want to use the minumum number of { and indentation levels, you can
write
markpole...@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 09:42:15 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Doc: Clarify \relative inside \repeat issue.
---
Documentation/notation/repeats.itely | 12 --
Documentation/usage/running.itely| 36 +
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 20
LGTM
Trevor
- Original Message -
From: Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com
To: Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu; Graham Percival
gra...@percival-music.ca
Cc: lilypond-devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 5:46 PM
Subject: Re: PATCH: Doc: Clarify \relative inside
Looks good to me. As a matter of fact, I really like it.
Carl
On 4/30/10 10:46 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
Carl Sorensen wrote:
I disagree with the idea that the simplest solution is to
move the \relative outside the \repeat.
I've attached a new patch following your
On 4/29/10 1:42 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
Carl,
you didn't reply to all, but here's my response anyway:
Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to not reply to all. Thanks for covering for
me.
- Mark
Carl Sorensen wrote:
I disagree with the idea that the simplest solution
Sending to list for completeness.
On 4/28/10 12:39 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
It struck me that there are more options for dealing with
the \relative inside \repeat issue. Can someone look over
this to make sure I'm not doing anything sacrililygious?
In my opinion, the
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
If you want to use the minumum number of { and indentation levels, you can
write
\context Voice \repeat unfold 2 \relative c' { c2 d }
or
\context Voice \repeat unfold 2 \relative c' {
c2 d
}
but back when the
...@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 23:33:04 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Doc: Clarify \relative inside \repeat issue.
---
Documentation/notation/repeats.itely | 58 ++
Documentation/usage/running.itely| 14 ++--
2 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 11:39:27PM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
It struck me that there are more options for dealing with
the \relative inside \repeat issue. Can someone look over
this to make sure I'm not doing anything sacrililygious?
As usual, I have no insights about the content, but in
13 matches
Mail list logo
