http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/1/scm/lily.scm
File scm/lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/1/scm/lily.scm#newcode226
scm/lily.scm:226: (ly:progress (_ "Using (ice-9 curried-definitions)
module\n"))
On 2010/09/25 21:45:21, Neil Puttock wrote:
(if (ly:get-
On 2010/09/25 23:39:33, ianhulin44 wrote:
Looking at warn.cc I can see ly:progress and ly:message are
synonymous.
ly:message always starts on a new line.
ly:progress calls progress_indication () directly, which has this
comment above it:
I felt some indication was useful at run-time that we
On 2010/09/26 00:00:27, Neil Puttock wrote:
On 2010/09/25 23:39:33, ianhulin44 wrote:
> Looking at warn.cc I can see ly:progress and ly:message are
synonymous.
ly:message always starts on a new line.
ly:progress calls progress_indication () directly, which has this
comment above
it:
On 2010/09/26 10:19:59, ianhulin44 wrote:
On 2010/09/26 00:00:27, Neil Puttock wrote:
>
> Why is that useful? It's irrelevant for anybody using 1.8.
--verbose messages are used for development and maintenance purposes
as well as
for advanced user hacking.
Yes.
E.g. messages are output f
New patchset uploaded
Ian
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/10001/scm/lily.scm
File scm/lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/10001/scm/lily.scm#newcode231
scm/lily.scm:231: (_ "module (ice-9 curried-definitions) not in Guile
1.8\n")
Change --verbose ly:mess
OK to remove offending line even when using Guile V1.8.7?
Ian
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/15001/scm/lily.scm
File scm/lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/15001/scm/lily.scm#newcode271
scm/lily.scm:271: (debug-enable 'debug)
This causes a deprecation warn
Hi Ian,
I will test your patch shortly.
Thanks,
Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/15001/scm/lily.scm
File scm/lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/15001/scm/lily.scm#newcode231
scm/lily.scm:231: (_ "Guile 1.8\n")
Okay, I can live with this. :)
ht
Hi Ian,
I just tested your patch.
In addition to the small tweak that is needed (see my comment below), it
seems that the `(use-modules (ice-9 curried-definitions))' statement
does not carry over to display-lily.scm. I am a bit puzzled by this.
This is the error message, in context:
;;; compi
Hi Patrick,
On 21/10/10 01:12, pnor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Ian,
>
> I just tested your patch.
>
> In addition to the small tweak that is needed (see my comment below), it
> seems that the `(use-modules (ice-9 curried-definitions))' statement
> does not carry over to display-lily.scm. I am a bi
New patch-set uploads (well two actually, but please review the latest).
Code in display-lily.scm to support Guile V2 now tested on Guile 1.8.7
system.
Cheers,
Ian
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/15001/scm/lily.scm
File scm/lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/d
Hi Ian,
This patch still isn't working for me with Guile 1.9.13. Guile 1.8 is
fine.
I posted some inline comments for you below.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure what to suggest for a fix. Could this be a
bug in Guile 1.9 ?
Thanks,
Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/di
Another thought re the conditional (define-module) idea, if it's (if)
making the guile compilation barf, we could try using (cond) or
(cond-expand) instead.
Ian
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.co
Hi Ian,
On 2010/11/25 15:56:26, ianhulin44 wrote:
Another thought re the conditional (define-module) idea, if it's
(if) making the guile compilation barf, we could try using
(cond) or (cond-expand) instead.
I just tried all of these options, and nothing seems to work. I'm
pretty baffled.
In
Hi Ian,
Please see my new comment regarding this patch (below).
Thanks,
Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm#newcode34
scm/display-lily.scm:34:
Jan
Hi Patrick,
On 2011/02/17 06:50:21, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Hi Ian,
Please see my new comment regarding this patch (below).
Thanks,
Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/dif
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm#newcode34
scm/display-lily.scm:34:
On 2011/02/17 06:50:21, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Jan recently removed all of the currie
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm#newcode34
scm/display-lily.scm:34:
On 2011/02/17 15:07:00, ianhulin44 wrote:
In which case, do we even need lily.scm to
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm#newcode34
scm/display-lily.scm:34:
We are in musicxml2ly and a few snippets:
$ git grep -l '(define (('
Is define-
OK all, I've worked out what to keep and what to nuke.
I'll prepare a new patch-set once I've rebased and tested with Guile V2
on my VM.
Cheers,
Ian
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/d
New patchset uploaded to Rietveld Issue 2219044.
Please review.
Cheers,
Ian
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 2011/02/17 17:05:25, Reinhold wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/diff/25001/scm/display-lily.scm#newcode34
scm/display-lily.scm:34:
> We are in musicxml2ly and a few snippe
LGTM.
Can you email me your patch so I can apply it?
Thanks,
Patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Hi Patrick,
On 18/02/11 02:13, pnor...@gmail.com wrote:
> LGTM.
>
> Can you email me your patch so I can apply it?
>
> Thanks,
> Patrick
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/2219044/
Here's the patch.
Cheers,
Ian
>From d5854eabd3618476bc0cd06eb09effba68806acd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ian Huli
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 4:38 AM, Ian Hulin wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> On 18/02/11 02:13, pnor...@gmail.com wrote:
>> LGTM.
>>
>> Can you email me your patch so I can apply it?
>
> Here's the patch.
I retested everything, and the patch checks out just fine. I've pushed it.
Thanks,
Patrick
___
24 matches
Mail list logo
