| Re: [frogs] chord_name_engraver - help with c++ ... |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lilynet.net/frogs Archives
]
- To: Carl Sorensen <c_sorensen@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [frogs] chord_name_engraver - help with c++ ...
- From: Jan Warchoł <lemniskata.bernoulliego@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 01:21:32 +0200
- Cc: Wols Lists <antlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "frogs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <frogs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=84MZL7V4vvkr4DkJfbfJIFIa52N+g3Rkh7hEoUeKY+8=; b=UYhyloft8rUsDPPJpkUjWqGtrz26RQYX5DuTWu7XnPMhH6TQyeZagdocK57Nc+9/J8 n/GoCmapg5C3Mltn+CVcBzOoRv8fIRK5l+uDl8iVx7c2bDVzzk6oD5EA8bw9e1sc4n1X Pcyx7E7bNWlGRPcZVoiSbftOe+y7yXQ9Fc0WY=
2011/7/7 Wols Lists <antlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On 06/07/11 22:04, Jan Warchoł wrote:
>> Could you prepare a formal patch? You'll need to modify
>> lilypond-git/Documentation/notation/chords.itely, around line 450.
>> Look at adjacent code to see how it should be formatted.
>
> Done. Not sure how well I've done it - I don't know where to find the
> "make" output to take a look at it :-) ...
Uploaded.
looks rather good. Let's see what others will say.
> Anyways, it didn't seem that difficult, except I haven't twigged what
> @funindex is for, so haven't used it - should I have?
i think it's used to create an index of functions, so you shouldn't.
W dniu 7 lipca 2011 02:00 użytkownik Carl Sorensen <c_sorensen@xxxxxxx> napisał:
>
> On 7/6/11 4:55 PM, "Wols Lists" <antlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 06/07/11 22:04, Jan Warchoł wrote:
>>> Could you prepare a formal patch? You'll need to modify
>>> lilypond-git/Documentation/notation/chords.itely, around line 450.
>>> Look at adjacent code to see how it should be formatted.
>>
>> Done. Not sure how well I've done it - I don't know where to find the
>> "make" output to take a look at it :-) ... hmmm - I've looked at the
>> docu and it seems not to be created by default, and needs apache, etc
>> etc etc
>>
>> Anyways, it didn't seem that difficult, except I haven't twigged what
>> @funindex is for, so haven't used it - should I have?
>
> Docs are not required by developers, so you've already gone beyond the
> minimum.
Oops, looks that i've required too much. Sorry.
Thanks!
Janek
---
----
Join the Frogs!