Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

[k-ohara5a5a]

On 2013/08/24 16:33:39, MikeSol wrote:

> On 2013/08/24 16:19:27, dak wrote:

> > Stupid question: _iff_ you store a _whole_ replacement skyline
anyway,
> > shouldn't pad-around just shift the original left/right/up/down
skylines
> > left/right/up/down by the given amount (don't ask me what to do
about the
> > corners, though)?

> It's a good idea, but stencils don't have left/right/up/down, so it'd
be hard to
> figure out how to add this padding to the stencils without additional
> plane-geometry functions.

A second stencil is not a very good data structure for reserving space.
Skylines are better at this, and we can \once\override 'padding and
'horizon-padding to get padding that follows the outlines of the
stencil.

The existing interface, \with-dimensions etc., gives a way to specify
the
simplest Skyline: a single box.  I struggled to make a regression test
for
these functions.  I used      \pad-to-box #'(0 . 6) #'(0 . 1) fa......}
to add a building around the dots... to the existing skyline of the "fa"
and had to use debug-skylines to get the dimensions right.

If I ever did need a more complex space-reservation shape, such as a
PostScript stencil, I would at first make the space-reservation print
light
blue and \combine with the printing stencil, so I can see if I got the
right
shape.  Your patch might save me a the few bytes of the \transparent
version
of the PostScript outline in my output.

The meaning of the "Cells" output is a little mysterious to me, with
Scheme
a garbage-collected system and all, but this patch makes one third of
the
reg-tests report using between 3% and 8% more "cells", which can't be
good.

https://codereview.appspot.com/12957047/