[email protected] wrote Wednesday, June 12, 2013 6:42 AM > I disagree. There is harm in having both since it makes people think > about which to use in which situation. Since we have \pad-x and \pad-y, > \pad-around makes more sense to keep. Not only does the name help with > knowing just what is padded, but also we don't tend to put "markup" in > command names redundantly. > > If we don't like convert-ly, we can just keep an undocumented > compatibility function. Or document it as "exists only for historical > reasons and is the same as pad-around".
I agree. Leave it available but documented as David suggests only in code comments. > https://codereview.appspot.com/9295044/ > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
