[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Doc: LM: Reformat ly code. (issue1056041)
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: Doc: LM: Reformat ly code. (issue1056041) |
Date: |
Thu, 6 May 2010 01:34:39 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 06:31:21PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> On 5/5/10 6:11 PM, "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> >>> sweet mao... you're adding barline checks to every single example?!
> OK. Final barline checks on examples where they add to the clarity of *that
> particular* examples would be fine with me.
Absolutely.
> But when I reviewed the patch,
> I felt that the final bar checks actually got in the way for me on virtually
> every example.
Absolutely. My highly-quoted text above should be read in a tone
of horror.
Cheers,
- Graham
Re: Doc: LM: Reformat ly code. (issue1056041), percival . music . ca, 2010/05/06
Re: Doc: LM: Reformat ly code. (issue1056041), percival . music . ca, 2010/05/06
Re: Doc: LM: Reformat ly code. (issue1056041), tdanielsmusic, 2010/05/06
Re: Doc: LM: Reformat ly code. (issue1056041), percival . music . ca, 2010/05/07