[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [LSR] Ready-to-use LilyPond macros: advanced layout and titles, usin

From: Thomas Morley
Subject: Re: [LSR] Ready-to-use LilyPond macros: advanced layout and titles, using a special stylesheet
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:59:30 +0200

2015-10-14 10:17 GMT+02:00 Pierre Perol-Schneider
>>I'm not top posting
> cc. Nicolas
> Hi Squad,
> In this snippet : http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=368
> there is a predefined 'vspace' command which causes some unwanted result :
> \version "2.18.2"
> \include "book-titling.ily"
> \markup\column { A \vspace #-5 B }
> I'd suggest to simply delete the 'vspace' defs in "book-titling.ily"
> Cheers,
> Pierre

Well, the coding is different, causing different results.

Look at the output from:

\version "2.18.2"

#(define-markup-command (vspace-lsr layout props amount) (number?)
  "This produces a invisible object taking vertical space."
  (let ((amount (* amount 3.0)))
    (if (> amount 0)
        (ly:make-stencil "" (cons -1 1) (cons 0 amount))
        (ly:make-stencil "" (cons -1 1) (cons amount amount)))))

  \line  {
    "lsr-def: " \box \column { A \vspace-lsr #-5 B }
    "source-def: " \box \column { A \vspace #-5 B }

In said snippet only positive numbers are used, thus no big difference.

I always think using negative numbers for vspace/hspace in order to
_move_ objects feels strange, quick'n dirty best to say. But that's
only me.

Depends what people wish.
I'm more or less undecided. Admittedly, using negative numbers will
circumvent calculated extents. Bug or feature?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]