On 14 June 2010 21:47, Alexander Kobel <n...@a-kobel.de> wrote: > On the other hand, I don't quite get why word-space = 1 is necessary. If > there's no space left, the user has trouble anyway, and I don't see why an > arbitrary minimum space should help. And this should be the reason for the > shift, IIUC. Seems like an ugly hack to me, but probably there's some > reason?
I don't know why that's there; the default is set in ly/paper-defaults-init.ly to 0.6. > Another question: What does "mol" stand for in the markup definitions, e.g. > in general-align in define-markup-commands.scm? It's short for "molecule", which used to be the standard name for stencils in LilyPond. > That's how far I could go. I just can't get the regression tests, so I > can't compare if it breaks desired output in other examples than mine. Sorry, I meant the regression tests run fine (with `make check'); no test snippets appear broken. > It does, but it also reindents the existing code in a completely different > manner than what's currently there. Some of the indentation in \fill-line is incorrect (e.g., for the definition of fill-space), so you're probably improving it. :) > If we do, we should probably "normalize" all stacked stencils (read: > right-column, too) in the same manner. Which would make sense to me, since > it's a consistent behaviour, but I suspect this to be incompatible with the > current design. And one might require to write \right-align \right-column > to get the (current?) extent ((- width) . 0), which looks clumsy from the > typical user's POV. Hmm, I hadn't considered that, though I wonder if anybody uses \right-column. Cheers, Neil _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel