Re: Changes.tely updated - 2.19.x up to June 2014 (issue 108130043 by address@hidden)

[Mark Polesky]

Well, that's unfortunate.  Here are 3 more options:

1) We could just use my code with the arrows, omit the
"verbatim", and label the examples as \fill-line and
\justify-line from within the text.

********************

2) We could do this:

\markup \typewriter \fill-line \underline {
  "|    "
  " |   "
  "  |  "
  "   | "
  "    |"
}

\markup \typewriter \justify-line \underline {
  "|    "
  "|    "
  "|    "
  "|    "
  "|    "
}

********************

3) We could add these lines to ly/text-replacements.ly:

       ;; Arrows
       ("&left;" . "←")
       ("&up;" . "↑")
       ("&right;" . "→")
       ("&down;" . "↓")

and do:

\paper { #(include-special-characters) }
\markup \typewriter \fill-line \underline {
  "&down;    "
  " &down;   "
  "  &down;  "
  "   &down; "
  "    &down;"
}

\paper { #(include-special-characters) }
\markup \typewriter \justify-line \underline {
  "&down;    "
  "&down;    "
  "&down;    "
  "&down;    "
  "&down;    "
}


On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 11:08 PM, James <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 04/07/14 08:17, address@hidden wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> https://codereview.appspot.com/108130043/diff/90001/Documentation/changes.tely#newcode151
> >
> > Documentation/changes.tely:151: \fill-line {Ooooo oOooo ooOoo oooOo
> > ooooO}
> > I prefer this:
> > \fill-line \underline {"↓    " " ↓   " "  ↓  " "   ↓ " "    ↓"}
> >
> >
> https://codereview.appspot.com/108130043/diff/90001/Documentation/changes.tely#newcode156
> >
> > Documentation/changes.tely:156: \justify-line {Ooooo Ooooo Ooooo Ooooo
> > Ooooo}
> > I prefer this:
> > \justify-line \underline {"↓    " "↓    " "↓    " "↓    " "↓    "}
> >
> > https://codereview.appspot.com/108130043/
>
> Hmm...
>
> I see what you are trying to do, but it doesn't really look that great
> on the output I think. I'm not convinced.
>
> See attached.
>
> The arrows don't seem to show up in the PDF output (that may be my
> viewer I haven't checked elsewhere) however if we did do this we would
> have remove the @lilypond verbatim because you cannot really see the
> 'words' clearly in the construction, it's just a 'bunch' of double quotes.
>
> I'll defer to the consensus of the dev group though.
>
> James
>