Issue 250530043: Doc: NR add @knownissues for Percent Repeats (Closed)
|
Created:
9 years, 9 months ago by pkx166h Modified:
9 years, 9 months ago CC:
lilypond-devel_gnu.org Visibility:
Public. |
DescriptionDoc: NR add @knownissues for Percent Repeats
Issue 4506
Added @knownissue where
percent repeats will not
'repeat' any timing changes
or /partial commands.
Patch Set 1 #
Total comments: 4
Patch Set 2 : Trevor's correction (this time). #Patch Set 3 : With David K's examples. #Patch Set 4 : Simplified examples further (lilypond-book takes care of that). #MessagesTotal messages: 15
https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... File Documentation/notation/repeats.itely (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... Documentation/notation/repeats.itely:764: @knownissues @knownissues should come after the end of the @seealso items, which include Snippets: and Internal Reference:. See CG 5.5.2. Otherwise, LGTM.
Sign in to reply to this message.
https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... File Documentation/notation/repeats.itely (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... Documentation/notation/repeats.itely:769: @q{timing track}. Experienced users will know what we mean with "timing track": it's basically sort of an established practice discussed occasionally on the user list. But a reader of the manual has no chance to figure out what we mean here. Do we generally add examples in @knownissues? If we do, this might be worth one. Or possibly two: one bad, one working.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 2015/07/19 18:56:10, Trevor Daniels wrote: > https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... > File Documentation/notation/repeats.itely (right): > > https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... > Documentation/notation/repeats.itely:764: @knownissues > @knownissues should come after the end of the @seealso items, which include > Snippets: and Internal Reference:. See CG 5.5.2. > > Otherwise, LGTM. Yes sorry, I was a bit too enthusiastic putting it *straight after* the first @seealso entry. Done.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Trevor's correction.
Sign in to reply to this message.
hang on, let me try one more time. :/
Sign in to reply to this message.
Trevor's correction (this time).
Sign in to reply to this message.
https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... File Documentation/notation/repeats.itely (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... Documentation/notation/repeats.itely:764: @knownissues On 2015/07/19 18:56:10, Trevor Daniels wrote: > @knownissues should come after the end of the @seealso items, which include > Snippets: and Internal Reference:. See CG 5.5.2. > > Otherwise, LGTM. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... Documentation/notation/repeats.itely:769: @q{timing track}. On 2015/07/19 19:11:00, dak wrote: > Experienced users will know what we mean with "timing track": it's basically > sort of an established practice discussed occasionally on the user list. But a > reader of the manual has no chance to figure out what we mean here. Do we > generally add examples in @knownissues? If we do, this might be worth one. Or > possibly two: one bad, one working. I seem to recall we have done examples with @knownissues, so if you can come up with something concise I can add it.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 2015/07/19 19:35:56, J_lowe wrote: > https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... > File Documentation/notation/repeats.itely (right): > > https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... > Documentation/notation/repeats.itely:764: @knownissues > On 2015/07/19 18:56:10, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > @knownissues should come after the end of the @seealso items, which include > > Snippets: and Internal Reference:. See CG 5.5.2. > > > > Otherwise, LGTM. > > Done. > > https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeat... > Documentation/notation/repeats.itely:769: @q{timing track}. > On 2015/07/19 19:11:00, dak wrote: > > Experienced users will know what we mean with "timing track": it's basically > > sort of an established practice discussed occasionally on the user list. But > a > > reader of the manual has no chance to figure out what we mean here. Do we > > generally add examples in @knownissues? If we do, this might be worth one. > Or > > possibly two: one bad, one working. > > I seem to recall we have done examples with @knownissues, so if you can come up > with something concise I can add it. Well, I'll offer \fixed c'' \new Staff { \repeat percent 3 { \time 5/4 c2. 2 \time 4/4 2 2 } } \fixed c'' \new Staff << \repeat percent 3 { c2. 2 2 2 } \repeat unfold 3 { \time 5/4 s4*5 \time 4/4 s1 } >> It only has the slight disadvantage of not actually working. The choice of double percent repeat is correct: that much is fine. But it does not find the bar line to sit on. Probably still worth using, and then blocking the issue on a fix of this problem as a separate issue. Can't be that hard. Famous last words.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Added David's examples.
Sign in to reply to this message.
With David K's examples.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Simplified examples further (lilypond-book takes care of that).
Sign in to reply to this message.
I noticed last week that Lilypond does not follow Gould's advice that the first occurrence of the repeated material and the percent symbols should not be interrupted by line breaks. (Sorry I don't have my copy with me to cite a page.) I've had higher priorities than creating a bug report, but since you're adding known issues, I thought I'd mention it.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 2015/07/22 11:30:55, Dan Eble wrote: > I noticed last week that Lilypond does not follow Gould's advice that the first > occurrence of the repeated material and the percent symbols should not be > interrupted by line breaks. (Sorry I don't have my copy with me to cite a > page.) I've had higher priorities than creating a bug report, but since you're > adding known issues, I thought I'd mention it. That's not a "known issue" since there is nothing precluding us from changing it. We don't add bugs or design decisions to "known issues" unless there are good reasons to expect the problem to persist for a long time.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 22/07/15 12:52, dak@gnu.org wrote: > On 2015/07/22 11:30:55, Dan Eble wrote: >> I noticed last week that Lilypond does not follow Gould's advice that > the first >> occurrence of the repeated material and the percent symbols should not > be >> interrupted by line breaks. (Sorry I don't have my copy with me to > cite a >> page.) I've had higher priorities than creating a bug report, but > since you're >> adding known issues, I thought I'd mention it. > > That's not a "known issue" since there is nothing precluding us from > changing it. We don't add bugs or design decisions to "known issues" > unless there are good reasons to expect the problem to persist for a > long time. > > https://codereview.appspot.com/250530043/ I created https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4518 For this. James
Sign in to reply to this message.
author James Lowe <pkx166h@gmail.com> Sun, 19 Jul 2015 18:31:39 +0000 (19:31 +0100) committer James Lowe <pkx166h@gmail.com> Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:51:42 +0000 (17:51 +0100) commit ca2d9d22be422c4de98bc246dc94f7f2fd274dd2
Sign in to reply to this message.
|
