Re: stencils: let some stencils carry a box-extent; issue 3255 (issue 9295044)

[lemzwerg]

> One possibly-interesting choice is whether the stencil-padding
functions should
> always replace the skyline with a box, or make the union of the
skyline with the
> box.  Clearly \with-dimensions needs to replace the skyline with a box
for your
> kludge \with-dimensions #'(0 . 0) #'(0 . 0) .  However, what would you
expect
> from  {c'1^\markup{ \pad-to-box #'(-1 . 5) #'(0 . 1) "High" }} ?  I
think I
> should pass both the box and the "High" to the skyline-creator so that
we use
> their union in this case.

Yes, the union, since the documentation of \pad-to box says `at least
the X-EXT, Y-EXT space'.  However, the documentation strings for all
\pad-XXX functions should be updated accordingly.  In particular, I
can't see any difference between \pad-around and \pad-markup.  Uh, oh,
looking closely at the source code I see that they are completely
identical, even after your patch!  This should probably be fixed too,
both in the docs and in the code...


https://codereview.appspot.com/9295044/