Great work!
http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/17001/12002 File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/diff/17001/12002#newcode743 scm/define-markup-commands.scm:743: I think this is EXCELLENT work and has enough shared features with the recently-committed connected-shape stencil so that the best elements of the two can be combined into one unified stencil. What I think is very strong about this approach (and what connected-shape lacks) is the relative versus absolute distinction with coordinates: the fact that here one can choose between the two on a line-by-line basis is very slick. I see 3.5 places where the patch may need improvement. 1 is that lineto and curveto seem unnecessary, as they can be automatically detected by the number of function arguments. Two is that I try to use predefined lilypond commands as much as possible when they exist - could the moveto's be calls to ly:stencil-translate? Third is that I am wary of any loop and/or for-each construct in scheme: I think there is a way to do this with tail-regression that dispenses with the loop and is more Schemy. Three.5, I think the extents are off for the curves in certain problematic cases, but that'll work hopefully work itself out via this proposition, to wit: I think the best way to move forward on this patch would be to work on merging its functionality and nomenclature into the connected-shape stencil. I'd be more than happy to iron that out with you on the sidelines - just shoot me an email and we'll get that up and running. http://codereview.appspot.com/1730044/show _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
