Re: Problems with Internals manual

[David Kastrup]

Aaron Hill <lilypond@hillvisions.com> writes:

> On 2020-06-17 1:35 am, Peter Toye wrote:
>> Robin,
>> Thanks. Fair enough. I guessed and experimented and got the result
>> that I wanted. But I'm not quite sure how I managed it!
>> A problem I had with minimum-X-extent is that it's a pair, but the
>> description describes it as a distance, which I'd have thought was a
>> single number!
>
> Hmm.
>
> ====
> minimum-X-extent (pair of numbers)
>   Minimum size of an object in X dimension, measured in staff-space
>   units.
> ====
>
> I see no mention of "distance", but "size" might often be thought of
> as a singular value.  In reality, extents are closer to "bounds" than 
> "size".  While the docs are pretty clear about the value being a pair
> of numbers, perhaps we should update the extent-related properties to
> use "bounds" as opposed to "size".

Minimum bounds?  Frankly, the description is rather useless.  Without
looking up the actual code, I would have no idea what the two numbers
here are supposed to signify, respectively.

-- 
David Kastrup