[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Towards a new pitch representation

From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: Towards a new pitch representation
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 15:03:24 -0700

On 12/30/10 2:07 PM, "Felipe Gonçalves Assis" <address@hidden>

> Hello,
> Issue 1278 (
> clarified that, in order to support some microtonal notations, LilyPond
> needs to use a different pitch representation.
> I am willing to make that happen. Of course, this will require some
> contribution from more experienced developers. That being said,
> this contribution needs to be no more than objective discussions
> about well-defined questions and, at the end, a patch review.

Hi, Felipe.

I've looked at your patch, but I'm having a bit of trouble seeing how the
patch resolves the issues that are identified in issue 1278.

I must admit that i've not yet fully understood Hans's emails on issue 1278.

How do your new two-element alterations improve the situation?

> Could you, please, help me with that?
> This thread is for such discussions. I intend to address issues
> sequentially and generally in a top-down direction.
> A useful reference will be the experimental patch I just posted
> on Rietveld:
> Please try it, and take a look at it if possible, but do not start
> commenting the code before we agree on the fundamentals.
> We might end up with a quite different version of that.

It would be very helpful for me to discuss this patch if you had a test file
that shows how the new features are used.

It would be even better if there were a test file that compiled but didn't
behave properly in 2.13.44, and then a corresponding file that does behave
properly in your patch.



reply via email to

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