Am 31.10.2010 00:07, schrieb Neil Puttock:
On 30 October 2010 22:40, Marc Hohlm...@hohlart.de wrote:
File /home/marc/git/lilypond/python/out/book_snippets.py, line 561, in
compose_ly
if self.global_options.safe_mode:
AttributeError: Values instance has no attribute 'safe_mode'
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 4:33 AM, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
I've put a new patch up on Rietveld, with the Scheme engraver moved to a
C++ engraver to avoid the challenges with documentation.
Thanks Carl! In the meantime, I've opened
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1375
Am 29.10.2010 11:05, schrieb Neil Puttock:
On 28 October 2010 23:55, Carl Sorensenc_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
Well, as far as I can see, Scheme engravers are really engravers, so they
ought to be documented in the IR along with the C++ engravers, not in an
appendix of the NR along with
On 30 October 2010 22:40, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote:
File /home/marc/git/lilypond/python/out/book_snippets.py, line 561, in
compose_ly
if self.global_options.safe_mode:
AttributeError: Values instance has no attribute 'safe_mode'
I don't think this has anything to do with your
On 10/30/10 3:40 PM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote:
Am 29.10.2010 11:05, schrieb Neil Puttock:
On 28 October 2010 23:55, Carl Sorensenc_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
Well, as far as I can see, Scheme engravers are really engravers, so they
ought to be documented in the IR along with the C++
I've put a new patch up on Rietveld, with the Scheme engraver moved to a
C++ engraver to avoid the challenges with documentation.
http://codereview.appspot.com/2723043
Thanks,
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/2191042/
___
lilypond-devel mailing
On 28 October 2010 23:55, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
Well, as far as I can see, Scheme engravers are really engravers, so they
ought to be documented in the IR along with the C++ engravers, not in an
appendix of the NR along with Scheme functions.
Although the approach you
Am 28.10.2010 14:53, schrieb carl.d.soren...@gmail.com:
LGTM.
However, I'm a bit nervous about putting bends as well into the
Tab_tie_follow_engraver. Not that the engraver won't work, but that the
Tab_tie_follow_engraver won't be part of the documentation.
Currently, I view Scheme engravers
LGTM.
However, I'm a bit nervous about putting bends as well into the
Tab_tie_follow_engraver. Not that the engraver won't work, but that the
Tab_tie_follow_engraver won't be part of the documentation.
Currently, I view Scheme engravers as a way for users (and snippets) to
add engraver
I've not reviewed the code but I share Carl's concern about scheme
engravers if there is no way of documenting them in the IR. If the
grobs have any user-servicable properties they must be properly
documented.
Trevor
http://codereview.appspot.com/2191042/
Am 28.10.2010 20:34, schrieb tdanielsmu...@googlemail.com:
I've not reviewed the code but I share Carl's concern about scheme
engravers if there is no way of documenting them in the IR. If the
grobs have any user-servicable properties they must be properly
documented.
Ok, I see the point, but
Am 28.10.2010 14:53, schrieb carl.d.soren...@gmail.com:
LGTM.
However, I'm a bit nervous about putting bends as well into the
Tab_tie_follow_engraver. Not that the engraver won't work, but that the
Tab_tie_follow_engraver won't be part of the documentation.
I think you misunderstood the
On 10/28/10 1:54 PM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote:
Am 28.10.2010 14:53, schrieb carl.d.soren...@gmail.com:
Currently, I view Scheme engravers as a way for users (and snippets) to
add engraver functionality, but not as an optimal way to add core
functionality.
I understand your argument,
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
I would *love* to have a way to document Scheme engravers such that we could
include them in the docs, but at present I have no knowledge of how to do
so.
Can anybody shed any light on this?
How about basic regrouping
On 10/28/10 4:50 PM, Valentin Villenave valen...@villenave.net wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
I would *love* to have a way to document Scheme engravers such that we could
include them in the docs, but at present I have no knowledge of how to
Am 20.10.2010 11:12, schrieb Marc Hohl:
Am 18.09.2010 22:21, schrieb n.putt...@gmail.com:
[...]
I think the only sane method would be to use a scheme engraver, since
you could acknowledge interesting grobs and make typesetting decisions
for the TabNoteHead based on the grobs present at a
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote:
I know, most developers are extremely busy right now.
This particular feature isn't listed on the tracker, but since 2.14 will
provide
a major change concerning the tablature handling, I think it is important
that
tablature
Am 27.10.2010 12:14, schrieb Valentin Villenave:
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Marc Hohlm...@hohlart.de wrote:
I know, most developers are extremely busy right now.
This particular feature isn't listed on the tracker, but since 2.14 will
provide
a major change concerning the tablature
Am 18.09.2010 22:21, schrieb n.putt...@gmail.com:
[...]
I think the only sane method would be to use a scheme engraver, since
you could acknowledge interesting grobs and make typesetting decisions
for the TabNoteHead based on the grobs present at a particular timestep.
Done.
This doesn't
n.putt...@gmail.com schrieb:
On 2010/09/17 07:01:40, marc wrote:
TO be honest, I don't understand what you mean here.
Add
#(ly:set-option 'check-internal-types)
to your snippet below.
Two of the bounds aren't TabNoteHeads; these are the left bounds of the
ties following a break.
Ah, ok,
On 2010/09/17 07:01:40, marc wrote:
TO be honest, I don't understand what you mean here.
Add
#(ly:set-option 'check-internal-types)
to your snippet below.
Two of the bounds aren't TabNoteHeads; these are the left bounds of the
ties following a break.
Try running `make check' to see what
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 9:21 PM, n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2010/09/17 07:01:40, marc wrote:
Done. Looking at various files in input/regression, I see there are
various formatting styles.
What about adding a file called template.ly or something similar,
which
can be copied and
edited
carl.d.soren...@gmail.com schrieb:
Looks good to me. Just a comment on the name of the new property to be
added to details.
Thanks,
Carl
Hello Carl,
http://codereview.appspot.com/2191042/diff/1/scm/define-grobs.scm
File scm/define-grobs.scm (right):
23 matches
Mail list logo
