[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: polychords: a working solution
From: |
Janek Warchoł |
Subject: |
Re: polychords: a working solution |
Date: |
Fri, 3 Feb 2012 23:16:44 +0100 |
2012/2/3 Tim McNamara <address@hidden>:
>
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 2:07 PM, James wrote:
>
>> Attached is the output
>
> Those look good! "Nice job" to the OP!
+1!
- polychords: a working solution, Jean-Alexis Montignies, 2012/02/03
- Re: polychords: a working solution, James, 2012/02/03
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Tim McNamara, 2012/02/03
- Re: polychords: a working solution,
Janek Warchoł <=
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Carl Sorensen, 2012/02/03
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Tim McNamara, 2012/02/03
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/05
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Jean-Alexis Montignies, 2012/02/05
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/16
- Re: polychords: a working solution, David Kastrup, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Graham Percival, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, David Nalesnik, 2012/02/17