Mike Solomon <mike...@ufl.edu> writes: > On Aug 30, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Keith OHara wrote: > >> Mike Solomon <mikesol <at> ufl.edu> writes: >> >>> As I stated in a previous mail, it is easy to re-instate >>> a length property in the stem-interface and then >>> build it into either Stem::internal_height or Stem::print. >>> I have no problem with this. >>> >> >> The KEEP LENGTH option is the best, >> because 'length and 'Y-extent should be distinct. >> > > In this case, it seems like the property should be called positions > and not length. Length presupposes that the begin position remains > constant and the end chagnes, whereas positions should take a pair > that gives the bottom and top of the stencil. Otherwise, users won't > be able to override the beginning point. > > Then, we could have > \override Stem #'positions = #(stem::length whatever) > > to reinstitute the old length function (or > stem::length-from-natural-beginning or whatever).
How about (stem::length fixed-at) where 0 fixes the starting point, 1 the ending point, and other values where you would think they would? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
