[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: RFC: \hideNote

From: Adam Spiers
Subject: Re: RFC: \hideNote
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 14:28:25 +0000

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Peekay Ex <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Adam Spiers
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>> I noticed that we already have \hideNotes and \unHideNotes, but that
>> is rather clumsy when you only want to hide a single note.  So I wrote
>> a patch to add \hideNote, and as a newbie to Lilypond development I
>> wanted to check that this was a sensible idea.  The patch is here,
>> although I haven't tested it properly yet because I'm still getting to
>> grips with the regression test suite:
>> It adds one sentence to the documentation which would need
>> translating.
> I am sure other more experienced programmers will chime in but having
> two 'similar' functions
> \hideNote
> \hideNotes
> Is a good idea.
> Although we do have
> \time
> and
> \times
> but they do very different things.
> Also with regard to updating documentation and translations you can
> read all about that in the Contributor's Guide.
> Essentially the translations are handled in a separate branch.
> Also you cannot just edit snippets like your commit shows, there is a
> process for this too that needs to be followed.

Thanks James.  I'm a little confused regarding snippets: I was aware
that files in Documentation/snippets are autogenerated from files in
Documentation/snippets/new, however I assumed that because the
autogenerated files were checked into git, that for consistency's sake
it would be cleaner to check in the changes to those too.  Isn't that
the case?

In this case, I'm only editing existing snippets, not adding new ones,
and clearly I can't submit the edits to LSR before \hideNote has been
implemented in Lilypond, so presumably in this case there is no need
to interact with LSR?

Having said that, running revealed two useful things:

  (a) I'd forgotten to update

  (b) running introduces spurious blank lines prior to
      lines which begin

        %% Translation of GIT committish: ...

I've pushed a new patch to github to address (a):

(b) smells like a bug in, can anyone confirm?

> If you like, for now I can add a tracker issue for you on this and if
> you send me a git format patch I can post this up on Rietveld (our
> current method of code verification) for you.

Please feel free to create a new issue to track this.  I guess you're
probably OK just adding my github repo as a remote and grabbing that
branch rather than me sending a git format patch?


reply via email to

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