
lilypond - issue #4176
Patch: Add regtests for numbered and single-digit time signature styles
Add regtests for numbered and single-digit time signature styles
Comment #1
Posted on Oct 27, 2014 by Massive Rhino(No comment was entered for this change.)
Comment #2
Posted on Oct 28, 2014 by Quick KangarooPatchy the autobot says: passes tests. Includes a full make doc
Comment #3
Posted on Oct 30, 2014 by Quick KangarooPatch on countdown for November 2nd
Comment #4
Posted on Nov 2, 2014 by Quick KangarooPatch counted down - please push
Comment #5
Posted on Nov 3, 2014 by Massive RhinoGit patch attached. TIA.
Comment #6
Posted on Nov 5, 2014 by Quick Kangarooauthor Dan Eble
Mon, 27 Oct 2014 02:24:35 +0000 (22:24 -0400)
committer James Lowe
Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:26:47 +0000 (11:26 +0000)
commit 586a6d331e22d0e1a255068f07c534d219c7c902
Comment #7
Posted on Dec 27, 2014 by Quick OxTwo bugs, issue 4178 and issue 4179, were discovered while developing these tests, showing that extremely long measures exceed what LilyPond is prepared to handle.
After discovering these issues, we seem to have pushed these regression tests anyway.
Probably three-digit numbers would suffice to test the printing of time signatures. \time 1/128 d128 \time 101 d1*101
Comment #8
Posted on Dec 27, 2014 by Quick OxComment #7 should have referenced issue 4179 and issue 4180 above, and new issue 4231. Let's change the two regression tests added above to :
\header { texidoc = "The numbered time signature style prints a fraction." }
\new Staff { \relative d' { \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'numbered \time 4/4 d1 \time 3/4 d2. \time 2/2 d1 \time 1/128 d128 #(ly:expect-warning "strange time signature found: 10/6") \time 10/6 \tuplet 6/4 { d2. d2 d2. d2 } } }
\header { texidoc = "The single-digit time signature style prints the numerator only." }
\new Staff { \relative d' { \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'single-digit \time 1/2 d2 \time 2/4 d2 \time 3/4 d2. \time 8/128 d16 \time 123/1 d1*123 } }
Comment #9
Posted on Dec 29, 2014 by Quick KangarooI'm confused on this one, I'm guessing this should now have no patch label at this time until someone submits something for testing?
Comment #10
Posted on Jan 3, 2015 by Quick OxI didn't think that adding two new regtests needed any testing beyond what I can do, but I made a thingy http://codereview.appspot.com/193910043
Comment #11
Posted on Jan 4, 2015 by Quick KangarooPatchy the autobot says: passes tests. includes a full make doc
Comment #12
Posted on Jan 7, 2015 by Quick KangarooPatch on countdown for Jan 10th
Comment #13
Posted on Jan 11, 2015 by Quick KangarooPatch counted down - please push
Comment #14
Posted on Jan 13, 2015 by Quick KangarooPatch counted down - please push
Comment #15
Posted on Jan 16, 2015 by Quick KangarooPatch counted down - please push
Comment #16
Posted on Jan 18, 2015 by Quick Oxcommit 8298bc08d2d6398af3b1c988b825ad36d355e7ee
Comment #17
Posted on Mar 2, 2015 by Quick Ox(No comment was entered for this change.)
Status: Verified
Labels:
Type-Enhancement
Fixed_2_17_19