Re: strut problem,Re: strut problem,Re: strut problem,Re: strut problem

[David Kastrup]

Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org> writes:

>>>>> Why is the vertical extent of the strut ignored?
>>>>
>>>> Because side positioning is primarily based on (vertical)
>>>> skylines, not extents.
>>>
>>> Thanks.  What is the reasoning behind this?  For me, this behaviour
>>> is unexpected.
>> 
>> By the way, this is one reason why \strut is not such a great thing
>> in my opinion.  I suppose that in LaTeX, {\strut abc} and {abc
>> \strut} (or whatever the exact syntax is) are equivalent.  In
>> LilyPond, they can't be, since if you want \strut to factor into the
>> skylines, its placement will be visible in the shape of the skylines
>> (and consequently make a difference in the spacing).
>
> You are correct with your LaTeX observation.  However, the longer I
> think about struts – even `\vspace` is nothing else than a vertical
> strut! – the more I believe that there is a conceptual problem in
> LilyPond: There is a 'typesetting mode' where vertical struts have an
> effect (like the problem originally reported in 'lilypond-user',
> starting with
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2022-11/msg00237.html),
> and there are other modes without such an effect.

You did see the code I posted that would do what you asked for?

-- 
David Kastrup