[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 48 and 72 ET
From: |
Hans Åberg |
Subject: |
Re: 48 and 72 ET |
Date: |
Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:22:40 +0100 |
> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:16, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Hans Åberg <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:53, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hans Åberg <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:44, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hans Åberg <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:24, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hans Åberg <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:10, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hans Åberg <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 22:47, Cole Ingraham <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've used Sagittal notation based on http://x31eq.com/lilypond/
>>>>>>>>>>> before. I don't know if that still works with more recent versions
>>>>>>>>>>> though. Haven't touched it in a while.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I get an error in LilyPond 2.19.45, with an unbound variable
>>>>>>>>>> "parser":
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> error: GUILE signaled an error for the expression beginning here
>>>>>>>>>> # (ly:parser-set-note-names parser EqualFiftythreePitchNames)
>>>>>>>>>> Unbound variable: parser
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there any reason people don't use convert-ly when upgrading to a
>>>>>>>>> newer version?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe because it is in some library files.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That doesn't even make sense.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The code makes use of three different external libraries.
>>>>>
>>>>> So? Why wouldn't you upgrade the libraries when upgrading LilyPond?
>>>>
>>>> Those are not my libraries. I updated some, that is hacked them to
>>>> work, but that was a year ago.
>>>
>>> And that means that you are not allowed to run convert-ly on them but
>>> have to edit them by hand instead?
>>>
>>> I'll stick with my "that doesn't even make sense" verdict, thank you
>>> very much.
>>
>> Why don't you do it? I have posted the code. So all you have to do is
>> to hack it back, as indicated above,
>
> The code you uploaded is already fixed. Taking regular.ly from
> x31eq.com and running convert-ly -ed -f 2.18.0 on it fixes the syntax.
>
>> and then run convert-ly on them to see if it works.
>
> It does.
>
> So is there any reason people don't use convert-ly when upgrading to a
> newer version?
For libraries, you would want to keep track of the changes, but running
convert-ly and do a diff is a good suggestion. Though doing it by hand was
quicker, as I remembered the issue and which files needed to be fixed.
In general, though, perhaps people maybe do not think or know about it, so the
process might be automated.
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, (continued)
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, David Kastrup, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, David Kastrup, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, David Kastrup, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, David Kastrup, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, David Kastrup, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET,
Hans Åberg <=
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Urs Liska, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/10
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, David Kastrup, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/10
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, David Kastrup, 2017/02/10
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/10
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, mskala, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Hans Åberg, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, Simon Albrecht, 2017/02/09
- Re: 48 and 72 ET, David Kastrup, 2017/02/10