[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Changes.tely updated - 2.19.x up to June 2014 (issue 108130043 by ad
From: |
Mark Polesky |
Subject: |
Re: Changes.tely updated - 2.19.x up to June 2014 (issue 108130043 by address@hidden) |
Date: |
Sat, 5 Jul 2014 03:21:31 -0700 |
Well, that's unfortunate. Here are 3 more options:
1) We could just use my code with the arrows, omit the
"verbatim", and label the examples as \fill-line and
\justify-line from within the text.
********************
2) We could do this:
\markup \typewriter \fill-line \underline {
"| "
" | "
" | "
" | "
" |"
}
\markup \typewriter \justify-line \underline {
"| "
"| "
"| "
"| "
"| "
}
********************
3) We could add these lines to ly/text-replacements.ly:
;; Arrows
("&left;" . "←")
("&up;" . "↑")
("&right;" . "→")
("&down;" . "↓")
and do:
\paper { #(include-special-characters) }
\markup \typewriter \fill-line \underline {
"&down; "
" &down; "
" &down; "
" &down; "
" &down;"
}
\paper { #(include-special-characters) }
\markup \typewriter \justify-line \underline {
"&down; "
"&down; "
"&down; "
"&down; "
"&down; "
}
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 11:08 PM, James <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 04/07/14 08:17, address@hidden wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> https://codereview.appspot.com/108130043/diff/90001/Documentation/changes.tely#newcode151
> >
> > Documentation/changes.tely:151: \fill-line {Ooooo oOooo ooOoo oooOo
> > ooooO}
> > I prefer this:
> > \fill-line \underline {"↓ " " ↓ " " ↓ " " ↓ " " ↓"}
> >
> >
> https://codereview.appspot.com/108130043/diff/90001/Documentation/changes.tely#newcode156
> >
> > Documentation/changes.tely:156: \justify-line {Ooooo Ooooo Ooooo Ooooo
> > Ooooo}
> > I prefer this:
> > \justify-line \underline {"↓ " "↓ " "↓ " "↓ " "↓ "}
> >
> > https://codereview.appspot.com/108130043/
>
> Hmm...
>
> I see what you are trying to do, but it doesn't really look that great
> on the output I think. I'm not convinced.
>
> See attached.
>
> The arrows don't seem to show up in the PDF output (that may be my
> viewer I haven't checked elsewhere) however if we did do this we would
> have remove the @lilypond verbatim because you cannot really see the
> 'words' clearly in the construction, it's just a 'bunch' of double quotes.
>
> I'll defer to the consensus of the dev group though.
>
> James
>