Issue 1278

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Issue 1278

Felipe Gonçalves Assis
Hello,

I would like to help solving Issue 1278 (arrow notation for quarter tones).

I understand that it is one of low priority and just an enhancement. I am
also aware that the development is currently focused on getting 2.14 out.
However, I believe this is a good opportunity for me to contribute since
it is something I could reasonably grasp.

I have written a patch that might be of interest. It addresses the issue
by changing the LilyPond representation of alterations to a pair of integers,
with no implied pitch values, as suggested by Hans Aberg
(http://www.mail-archive.com/lilypond-devel@gnu.org/msg30877.html).

I believe this to be at least a concrete starting point. Even if we decide for
something different, I could be of assistance, both in discussions and
code-work.

The help I would need back from more experienced developers would be
mainly in:
  * Discussion of some design decisions;
  * Some clarifications on regression tests;
  * Writing convert-ly rules;
  * Kind reviews of my Scheme code.

By the way, with regard to my qualifications, I think it is important to
say that I speak C++ natively, but have just learnt enough Lisp/Scheme/Guile
to make the mentioned patch work. Also, I am familiar with basic music
theory, but everything I know about quarter tones arrow notation comes
from the feature request. Finally, I am new to git, but with that I am
getting along pretty well.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Felipe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Issue 1278

Carl Sorensen
Felipe,

I apologize for being so slow to respond.  I lost this mail in my mail
handling system.

On 12/22/10 9:43 PM, "Felipe Gonçalves Assis" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to help solving Issue 1278 (arrow notation for quarter tones).
>
> I understand that it is one of low priority and just an enhancement. I am
> also aware that the development is currently focused on getting 2.14 out.
> However, I believe this is a good opportunity for me to contribute since
> it is something I could reasonably grasp.
>
> I have written a patch that might be of interest. It addresses the issue
> by changing the LilyPond representation of alterations to a pair of
> integers,
> with no implied pitch values, as suggested by Hans Aberg
> (http://www.mail-archive.com/lilypond-devel@.../msg30877.html).


Can you upload a patch to Reitveld for review?  That would be the easiest
way to get started.  Use git-cl to upload the patch, then go to the Rietveld
issue and Publish and Mail comments to announce the posting of the patch.

>
> I believe this to be at least a concrete starting point. Even if we decide
> for
> something different, I could be of assistance, both in discussions and
> code-work.
>
> The help I would need back from more experienced developers would be
> mainly in:
>   * Discussion of some design decisions;
>   * Some clarifications on regression tests;
>   * Writing convert-ly rules;
>   * Kind reviews of my Scheme code.

We'll be happy to provide feedback for you.

Where you are starting with such a major issue (major in the sense that it
affects the fundamental representations in LilyPond, rather than just
creating some new output), I think it best to start right off in
conversations with the core developers.

>
> By the way, with regard to my qualifications, I think it is important to
> say that I speak C++ natively, but have just learnt enough Lisp/Scheme/Guile
> to make the mentioned patch work. Also, I am familiar with basic music
> theory, but everything I know about quarter tones arrow notation comes
> from the feature request. Finally, I am new to git, but with that I am
> getting along pretty well.

We are always happy to welcome a new developer to the community.

Thanks,

Carl


---
----
Join the Frogs!

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Issue 1278

Felipe Gonçalves Assis
Hi Carl,

Thanks for your reply!

On 29 December 2010 18:54, Carl Sorensen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Felipe,
>
> I apologize for being so slow to respond.  I lost this mail in my mail
> handling system.
>

No problem. It gave me some more time to study Lilypond, Scheme and Guile.

>
> Can you upload a patch to Reitveld for review?  That would be the easiest
> way to get started.  Use git-cl to upload the patch, then go to the Rietveld
> issue and Publish and Mail comments to announce the posting of the patch.
>

Done. I should remark, though, that before reviewing the patch, we should
discuss the top design decisions involved. I may upload a new patch in the
future, if necessary.

>
> We'll be happy to provide feedback for you.
>
> Where you are starting with such a major issue (major in the sense that it
> affects the fundamental representations in LilyPond, rather than just
> creating some new output), I think it best to start right off in
> conversations with the core developers.
>

So, should I start a thread on lily-devel?

>
> We are always happy to welcome a new developer to the community.
>

Again, thank you very much for your attention.

Cheers,
Felipe

---
----
Join the Frogs!