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

[dak]

On 2013/06/13 07:45:09, Keith wrote:
> On 2013/06/12 19:02:55, dak wrote:
> >

https://codereview.appspot.com/9295044/diff/37001/scm/define-markup-commands.scm
> > File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):
> >
> >

https://codereview.appspot.com/9295044/diff/37001/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#newcode1911
> > scm/define-markup-commands.scm:1911: (list 'explicit-extent-stencil
x y
> > (ly:stencil-expr m))
> > why not 'with-dimensions instead of 'explicit-extent-stencil?

> It could be 'dimension-stencil as it lives alongside 'rotate-stencil,
> 'scale-stencil, etc.,

Well, "rotate" and "scale" are verbs and "dimension" isn't, so that
particular form has me less than enthused.  I am also not a fan of
inventing new and unrelated naming schemes for facets of implementing
the same functionality.

Somewhat in line with rotate and scale would seem to be
with-dimensions-stencil, combining the markup name with "stencil".

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