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

[dak]

On 2013/06/11 16:15:45, Keith wrote:

> > 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...

> There is no harm in having both.  There might be people who habitually
use
> each, and we cannot convert-ly their brains to use whichever one we
pick.

I disagree.  There is harm in having both since it makes people think
about which to use in which situation.  Since we have \pad-x and \pad-y,
\pad-around makes more sense to keep.  Not only does the name help with
knowing just what is padded, but also we don't tend to put "markup" in
command names redundantly.

If we don't like convert-ly, we can just keep an undocumented
compatibility function.  Or document it as "exists only for historical
reasons and is the same as pad-around".

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