I don't mean that with *broken*. I mean that it's unusable, given that the values you put inside this function don't correspond to anything that you can measure. Then, pretty random values.
Please note that this doesn't happen with \override SomeGrob.X/Y-offset. In that case, you can measure the offset with a ruler (in a very uncomfortable way, though, given that you have to offset the ruler as well with the ref point of the grob). Thanks, Paolo On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 11:55 PM Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> wrote: > > > > > *From: *Paolo Prete <paolopr...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 2:30 PM > *To: *Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> > *Cc: *Lilypond-User Mailing List <lilypond-user@gnu.org> > *Subject: *Re: Distance of a grob from its reference point > > > > Then, do you agree that this causes that the \offset command is broken at > least for the X/Y-offset properties of any grob? > > > > It depends on what you mean by “broken”. If you mean it doesn’t give an > offset from what the final position would be without the \offset command, > yes, it’s broken for Y-offset of any grob whose Y-offset is a an > unpure-pure container. > > > > Please correct me if I'm wrong. I would be very happy to see a solution or > an alternative for making *fine tuning* while preserving the > avoid-collisions algo. > > In addition, I wonder if is there a way to get the final positioning (and > then the actual distance from the reference point) by overriding some stuff > in the .scm code. This is how I generated the html file instead of the svg > one. > > There is not, as far as I know. > > > > Carl > > > >
