Hi Simon, On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Simon Albrecht <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18.06.2016 17:27, David Nalesnik wrote: >> >> (I would propose that bound-padding be redefined as a pair in the code >> base. Broken-bound-padding, too. The latter is not replaced with a >> broken-bound-padding-pair in this code experiment, but that should be easily >> done.) > > > Well, it should be pretty easy to use number-or-pair?, shouldn’t it? That > way you can use both as a matter of convenience. >
That should be workable. Also, I see now that the situation with broken hairpins is a bit more complex (bound-padding still does have an impact). Will see what I can do about that, and your suggestion, Simon. David _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
