exact inversion

exact inversion

[benko.pal, 2011-02-19 12:03:22]

following up on modal transformation

[pkx166h, 2011-02-20 01:06:36]

Just minor stuff for the NR.

James

http://codereview.appspot.com/4173065/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4173065/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:823: The syntax is
Remove the line 'The syntax is' as the @example makes it redundant.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4173065/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:830: This means that @code{@var{musicexpr}}
is inverted interval by
'... is inverted interval-by-interval ...' to make it clearer.

[benko.pal, 2011-02-20 08:13:42]

> Just minor stuff for the NR.

all implemented.

[pkx166h, 2011-02-21 11:04:48]

NR edits LGTM - can't comment on the other .ly files. Sorry.

[Graham Percival (old account), 2011-02-22 07:44:05]

LTGM, passes regtests.

[Trevor Daniels, 2011-02-22 10:52:02]

The patch works fine, but the documentation could be improved.  Expanding the
example in a different section to show \inversion is not optimal.  We need an
@lilypond{} immediately after the @example showing the syntax in the Inversion
section.

Also, with this addition, it would be sensible to take \retrograde out of the
Modal transformations section and place it in a section of its own, like
Inversion.

All this could be done in a separate patch I guess, so LGTM.

[benko.pal, 2011-02-22 10:56:51]

> The patch works fine, but the documentation could be improved.

agreed.

> Expanding the example in a different section to show \inversion is not
> optimal.

sorry, I don't get that.

> We need an @lilypond{} immediately after the @example showing
> the syntax in the Inversion section.
>
> Also, with this addition, it would be sensible to take \retrograde out
> of the Modal transformations section and place it in a section of its
> own, like Inversion.

agreed.

> All this could be done in a separate patch I guess, so LGTM.

should I move retrograde into its own section now or is there a
volunteer who can improve the documentation on transpose and
inversion as well after pushing as is?

p

[t.daniels_treda.co.uk, 2011-02-22 11:20:44]

Benkő Pál wrote Tuesday, February 22, 2011 10:56 AM

> should I move retrograde into its own section now or is there a
> volunteer who can improve the documentation on transpose and
> inversion as well after pushing as is?

I'm happy to fix up the documentation, so I will
apply this as-is if I hear nothing contrary in the
near future.

Trevor

[benko.pal, 2011-02-22 11:28:24]

>> should I move retrograde into its own section now or is there a
>> volunteer who can improve the documentation on transpose and
>> inversion as well after pushing as is?
>
> I'm happy to fix up the documentation, so I will
> apply this as-is if I hear nothing contrary in the
> near future.

thanks!

[Trevor Daniels, 2011-02-22 15:59:29]

Pushed to git/origin/master 22 Feb 11
d245674e0266cde01a425317fa28aeb792ce589d
7230509dd005d9bbc7b2a7f0a064abc2de3b0ce6

plus doc changes
28c797d550d5557e75842c59a459aa48349e7ad5
94cce45d444cd6700d3f4df84cda68fb7de96cd7

Trevor

[benko.pal, 2011-02-22 16:13:18]

> Pushed to git/origin/master 22 Feb 11
> d245674e0266cde01a425317fa28aeb792ce589d
> 7230509dd005d9bbc7b2a7f0a064abc2de3b0ce6
>
> plus doc changes
> 28c797d550d5557e75842c59a459aa48349e7ad5
> 94cce45d444cd6700d3f4df84cda68fb7de96cd7

thanks again!
p