David Kastrup wrote:
PMA<peterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu> writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
PMA<peterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu> writes:
Jim Long wrote:
I suppose that, by extension, this means that a factor of #0.0
means the layout would have no spacing at all, and all glyphs
would be engraved over the top of each other in one big blob, and
a factor of #-1.0 would mean that the glyphs are engraved
normally, but spaced right-to-left. For the sake of
reasonableness/sanity, perhaps Lily might just disallow factors<
or perhaps even<= 0, unless someone can make a compelling use
case for non-positive spacing factors.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Unless we'd prefer to make>0 expand,
<0 contract, and =0 change nothing).
And to get right-to-left, you then set the value to i*pi. And
bottom-to-top is i*pi/2.
I presume this reveals my thought as clueless.
Then whoever designed font-size must be equally clueless.
Apparently the parameter _must_ function as a factor. Sorry.
Don't see how this follows. I was just making some mathematically
inspired fun but it was not really relevant.
I was thinking only that, if I'm to expand something by a factor
of 1.1 (and so feed "#1.1" to a resizing function), then I'd like,
for contracting instead by the same factor, to feed the function
the same _absolute_ value, negated o'course so the function
will know the difference -- assuming it'll interpret the '-' value
as "Multiply by 0.9" (and knows to treat an input '0' as a '1').
But maybe this sort of tidiness is a quirk -- or a crutch for the
mathematically naive, which I'm afraid I am.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
