[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Ping] extraNatural and key changes

From: James Bailey
Subject: Re: [Ping] extraNatural and key changes
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 00:16:07 +0100

On Jan 15, 2011, at 12:48 AM, Keith OHara wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 15:31:21 -0800, Keith OHara <address@hidden> wrote:
>>  The code causing this behavior appeared [...]
>> so the behavior I dislike would have first appeared in 2.10.3.
>> Keith,
>> You say this appeared in 2.10.3. In which stable release was the behaviour 
>> correct?
> Phil,
>  I had trouble running 2.10 due to library conflicts, so I tested the old 
> *section* of code with the current release and found to my surprise that only 
> partial cancellations were printed.
> I made an unfounded mental leap up above, from seeing code that looked like 
> it was doing what I thought right, to assuming it behaved that way.  I 
> misread "if this pitch has any accidental in the new signature" as my 
> expectation "if this pitch has a different accidental in the new signature".
> It looks like Lilypond /never/ printed all the canceling naturals, until Rune 
> added the logic to find them all just before 2.10.3.  At that time he made 
> his enhancement optional, controlled by extraNatural.
> Now I want his enhancement all the time because the old behavior, still seen 
> with extraNatural=#f, is just wrong.
> Patch at <http://codereview.appspot.com/4014041/>
> -Keith

So I'm clear, is this a feature request?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]