Re: GSOC: change XY-extent to outer-XY-extent and inner-XY-extent (design - feedback requested)

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hi Janek,

there has been discussion on your patch.
I see your point, that you want to discriminate graphical, logical and 
perhaps some other extents. I also agree with Keith, that we shouldn't 
fill our RAM with redundant or unused data.
What about an extent-map, where extents can be stored by key? And 
propably there is already a usable map (GROB-properties?)?
The idea of having different extent-sizes may reduce the scheme-coding 
necessary for several things besides lyrics, like the subito f you 
mentioned for example. I use a lot of code, to align things like that 
correctly ... I will not post it here, because its too hackish ;-)

Cheers, Jan-Peter



On 19.06.2012 20:00, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 12:15 AM, Janek Warchoł
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Joe Neeman <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > The only difference is that I'm proposing
> > > to make it possible to define aligned_on_y_parent in scheme, given that
> > > aligned_on_parent is defined in C++. This part is basically what will allow
> > > us to avoid hard-coding a single name (like "core-extent") into the C++
> > > code.
> > What about giving more power to alignment properties?  Currently
> > self-alignment-[XY] is quite limited - you cannot specify parent and
> > child alignment separately, you cannot specify which parent you want,
> > and the name is confusing (after all, when aligned-on-[xy]-parent is
> > used, parent's extent matters, too).
> > I hope to cook a draft demonstrating this tomorrow.
> Here's the patch:
> http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/
> Please let me know what you think!
>
> cheers,
> Janek
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel