Re: "patch" for underline function

[Alexander Kobel]

On 2010-05-25 14:33, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I want to have independent control of the thickness and offset of the
> underline markup function -- unfortunately, they are currently linked
> (i.e., the offset is a multiple of the thickness). [...]

[This mail is essentially copied from 
<http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1104> to have it on 
-devel...]

@ Graham: W.r.t. 
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-07/msg00015.html>, what's 
a non-developer supposed to do with his review?  Post on -devel? 
Comment in the issue description?  Both?  Neither?


Hi, Kieren,


LGTM, but I'm not allowed to push, too.  I'm just trying to follow 
Graham's beg for reviewers...

A minor correction:
(* -1 offset) can be simplified to (- offset) in the (let*) clause for y.
>    (let* ((thick (* (ly:output-def-lookup layout 'line-thickness)  [...]
>           (y (* -1 offset))                                       [...]

I like your default value for offset, since in normalsize text, the 
underline does not cross the descenders of the font.  But I wonder 
whether both offset (linearly) and thickness (<= linearly) should be 
scaled with font-size, for a consistent look e.g. in the 
((sub-)sub-)title fields?


Cheers,
Alexander