Yes, but, it's necessary too to add a *warning* on the Lilypond output. This is much more clear for the user than the documentation.
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 1:12 AM Carl Sorensen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > *From: *Paolo Prete <[email protected]> > *Date: *Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 4:45 PM > *To: *Carl Sorensen <[email protected]> > *Cc: *Lilypond-User Mailing List <[email protected]> > *Subject: *Re: Distance of a grob from its reference point > > > > Thanks to you Carl. > > > > Now, given that it's nonsense to offset an unknown value, I would remove > this property from the offset command of Lilypond. > > Or at least, if that remove is not easily doable in the internal API, > raise a *heavy* warning that you are using a random/deprecable command. > > Please do not see that as bad criticism. I'm telling that because it could > save time to other people. > > > > \offset is, as described in the NR, applicable to any property that has a > number value, including user-defined properties. It is not created > explicitly on a property-by-property basis. > > > > I could see that it might be useful to add a known issue to the \offset > command section of the NR that might say something like > > > > “If the property being offset has a default value (as mentioned in the > Internals Reference) that is an unpure-pure-container function, the results > of the \offset command may not provide a simple numerical offset from the > results without the \offset command applied.” > > > > Thanks, > > > > Carl > > >
