Fix for several musicxml2ly bugs.

Fix for several musicxml2ly bugs.



musicxml2ly: title, chord symbol and midi bug

Titles and headers can now contain single words followed by a
 punctuation mark (.,!:).  See issue 1983.

Chord symbols are now placed above staffs instead of below.

musicxml2ly now includes an out-commented midi-block in every .ly-file.

Docs: Added command line options -m and --midi to Usage

[Julien Rioux, 2012-02-29 22:33:45]

This patch is not associated with any issue in the bug tracker. It will not get
a proper review until it is added there, and the automatic testing shows that it
does not cause any unexpected problems. Should it be added to issue 1983, or is
it sufficiently different that we should open a new issue for it?

There are a lot of formatting changes to musicxml.py that are unnecessary and
make it difficult to see the meaningful changes in your patch. You also
introduce whitespace errors. So please revert the changes to musicxml.py except
for...

http://codereview.appspot.com/5697059/diff/1/scripts/musicxml2ly.py
File scripts/musicxml2ly.py (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5697059/diff/1/scripts/musicxml2ly.py#newcode25
scripts/musicxml2ly.py:25: # Store command-line options in a global variable, so
we can access them everywhere
...this typo...

http://codereview.appspot.com/5697059/diff/1/scripts/musicxml2ly.py#newcode534
scripts/musicxml2ly.py:534: return None
...and this thinko.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5697059/diff/1/scripts/musicxml2ly.py#newcode2570
scripts/musicxml2ly.py:2570: p.version = ('''%prog (LilyPond) 2.15.24\n\n'''
Especially, don't change this.

[Julien Rioux, 2012-02-29 22:35:18]

On 2012/02/29 22:33:45, Julien Rioux wrote:
> So please revert the changes to musicxml.py

I mean musicxml2ly.py

[pl_s, 2012-03-01 17:23:23]

On 2012/02/29 22:33:45, Julien Rioux wrote:
> This patch is not associated with any issue in the bug tracker. It will not
get
> a proper review until it is added there, and the automatic testing shows that
it
> does not cause any unexpected problems. Should it be added to issue 1983, or
is
> it sufficiently different that we should open a new issue for it?

Well it would certainly be easier for me if we opened a new issue for this patch
as it contains fixes for several bugs I reported lately.  For some of them no
issues were opened. Here are the bugs / reports at stake:
-) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1983
-) http://old.nabble.com/musicxml2ly%3A-chordnames-placement-bug-td33309393.html
-) http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2012-02/msg00519.html

I also added 2 lines to Usage as the new command line options -m and --midi
hadn't been added yet.

Beyond that I have a partial fix for
(http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1969). Should I make a new
patch or can I add the code here?

> There are a lot of formatting changes to musicxml.py that are unnecessary and
> make it difficult to see the meaningful changes in your patch. You also
> introduce whitespace errors. So please revert the changes to musicxml.py
except
> for...
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5697059/diff/1/scripts/musicxml2ly.py
> File scripts/musicxml2ly.py (right):
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5697059/diff/1/scripts/musicxml2ly.py#newcode25
> scripts/musicxml2ly.py:25: # Store command-line options in a global variable,
so
> we can access them everywhere
> ...this typo...
OK.  Will do.  But I'll leave out the former lines 477 and 478 as this _is_ a
meaningful change.

Thanks for your help!
patrick

BTW: I should mention that the bugs in this patch were fixed by René Fauck.
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5697059/diff/1/scripts/musicxml2ly.py#newcode534
> scripts/musicxml2ly.py:534: return None
> ...and this thinko.
> 
>
http://codereview.appspot.com/5697059/diff/1/scripts/musicxml2ly.py#newcode2570
> scripts/musicxml2ly.py:2570: p.version = ('''%prog (LilyPond) 2.15.24\n\n'''
> Especially, don't change this.

[cpkc_shaw.ca, 2012-03-01 19:39:40]

On 12-03-01 10:23 AM, ptrcklschmdt@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> Well it would certainly be easier for me if we opened a new issue for
> this patch as it contains fixes for several bugs I reported lately.  For
> some of them no issues were opened. Here are the bugs / reports at
> stake:
> -) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1983

This sounds very straightforward; can you cook up a small patch 
restricted to this item alone
> -)
> http://old.nabble.com/musicxml2ly%3A-chordnames-placement-bug-td33309393.html 
>

This one sounds like issue 1969, and could probably be added as a comment.

> -) http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2012-02/msg00519.html
>
> I also added 2 lines to Usage as the new command line options -m and
> --midi hadn't been added yet.
>

Because this one brings in the MIDI set of . . . complications . . . it 
should probably have a separate tracker item.

> Beyond that I have a partial fix for
> (http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1969). Should I make
> a new patch or can I add the code here?

This would involve creating a Rietveld item referencing tracker 1969, 
which would be the better way of handling the work in process patch.


I gather you would like to create a single tracker item and merge all 
the above into it, but that might make the result rather too broad for 
easy review and analysis.


Cheers,
Colin

-- 
I've learned that you shouldn't go through life with a catcher's mitt on both
hands.
You need to be able to throw something back.
-Maya Angelou, poet (1928- )

[Julien Rioux, 2012-06-28 10:42:28]

Hi Patrick,

A cleaned up version of this patch has been committed (and credited to you), so
you may close this Rietveld issue. You will see the fix in version 2.15.41, the
next development release.

Cheers,
Julien

[pl_s, 2012-06-29 09:04:44]

Hey Julien,

thanks a million!

Cheers,
patrick