lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Issue #3947] fixing \huge et al.


From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: [Issue #3947] fixing \huge et al.
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:53:55 +0000
User-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.3.170325

On 6/7/17 12:17 PM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of Kieren MacMillan"
<address@hidden on behalf of
address@hidden> wrote:

>Hello all,
>
>Thanks to some help (on the user-list) from David K, I've started to
>attack issue #3947.
>(I figured this would be a nice, relatively painless way to get my feet
>wet in the dev/git/patch process.)
>
>The snippet included below is what I have so far. It appears to work as
>hoped.
>
>Two questions:
>
>1. Does the skip appear *roughly* right to people? (I plan to use a
>mathematical interpolation/model/formula, but wanted to get
>approval/concensus/comments first.)

The spacing appears pretty good to me.

>
>2. Seems like a lot of redundant coding here҆ Should I add an abstracted
>function (e.g., fontsizer), which is then called by \huge et al.?

Seems like an abstracted function with two parameters (magstep and
baselineskip) would be about right.  Of course, if you can determine
baselineskip from magstep, you would only need one parameter.


You have not yet tested your baseline-skip parameter with a different
default-staff-size.  I think that you will probably need to include the
default baseline-skip when determining the new baseline-skip.  Font sizes
avoid this problem by using a scale parameter.  I don't know that it's
possible to use a scale parameter for baseline-skip.


>
>#(define-markup-command (huge layout props arg)
>  (markup?)
>  #:category font
>  "Set font size to +2.
>
>@lilypond[verbatim,quote]
>\\markup {
>  default
>  \\hspace #2
>  \\huge
>  huge
>}
>@end lilypond"
>  (interpret-markup layout (prepend-alist-chain 'baseline-skip 4
>(prepend-alist-chain 'font-size 2 props)) arg))

Is there any place else in the codebase where we include lilypond examples
in the doc strings?  It seems like we ought to try for consistency; either
use lilypond examples in all of the doc strings (maybe at least for markup
functions) or in none of them.  I don't know the right answer; I'm just
raising the question.


Looks like a great start.

Thanks,

Carl




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]