[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: regression tests

From: Valentin Villenave
Subject: Re: regression tests
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:51:45 +0200

2007/9/11, Reinhold Kainhofer <address@hidden>:

> The program reference is (by definition) so closely tied to the internals of
> lilypond that you'll need a lot of experience with lilypond (to know about
> grobs, interfaces, events, etc.), that it's quite hard to turn things into
> real code. I mostly use trial-and-error then until I get the correct position
> to set one flag or so.
> With the regression test snippets you already have the correct code and can
> copy it.

Don't blame me for quoting myself, but I just wanted to mention a line
from my previous mail (which has been lost in this thread), and Jan's

> > > How about, for example,
> >
> > That page could serve as a frontend to different versions, just like
> >
> >

I do think, like Graham, that regtests do not belong in Documentation.
You want to cope with "actual code": I understand that, and nodoby
will prevent you from accessing the regtests.

However, they are *not* Documentation. They do not contain verbose
explanations, they're not redacted, nor corrected, nor formatted, nor
organized, by any Documentation guy (excepted when the Documentation
guy happens to be the bug-tracking guy too :)

The Reference is *pure* Documentation stuff, as it's intended for
people who'd wish to fully understand the complete LilyPond process.
When you want an easy, quick solution, without necessarily
understanding how, why, when, where etc. it works; here's the LSR.

What you're looking for isn't in the LSR? Don't think "oh crap, the
LSR isn't any good, I'll never come back again"; just browse every
other non-Documentation sources (archives, regtests etc), and add it
to the LSR, so the next guy can be given a quick solution.

That's why I fully agree with Graham having reduced the amount of
links on the page
(actually I suggested the current layout).

I do think there *has* to be a link to the regtests, but as said
before we need to find another place. It can be on web/devel, it can
be elsewhere. I just wanted to point out that it would make this
precise page more complete than it is now.

> > I wish that more users searched the mailist archives, but they don't.
> > Useful tips sent to the mailist are essentially lost knowledge;
> > that's why I've really been pushing LSR.

Excellent point. Avoiding lost knowledge; that's what we try to do.

> A while ago, while I was working on some choir pieces, I collected some links
> and snippets that I frequently need. Most are from LSR, but e.g. the
> following don't seem to have made it to the LSR:

...Then how comes you haven't added these yourself yet? This is
precisely what Graham wants to avoid in the future, by removing the
link of the main Documentation page.

OK, I've added the last three of your four snippets.
I let you add the first one, about dotted rests not fully merging;
IMHO it could be reported on Google tracker too, as I think the dots
should be merged in such a case...


reply via email to

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