I think that use of a font that needs a module that has been
removed should result in an error code.
Normally, it does. The exception is the hinter which isn't
needed.
Are you saying that pshinter is not needed to render the font?
Yes.
I think it is for the trade gothic font
Suppose you ran a program like ftview to render the whole font to a
bitmap with each hint option, at a large point size like 64. Would
they be the same? This would have caught the bug/regression you
fixed. Or maybe I should rephrase the question. This could be a
test tool the calculates
and email to the freetype list is too costly. I think that use of
a
font that needs a module that has been removed should result in an
error code.
Normally, it does. The exception is the hinter which isn't needed.
Are you saying that pshinter is not needed to render the font? I
2. Are there any tests showing that fonts at a large point size are
identical regardless of the hint module used?
Please explain in more detail, given that the scaling bug is
now fixed.
Sure. Suppose you ran a program like ftview to render the whole font to
a bitmap with each hint
1. My understanding of hints is that they are needed when the font
is small to help the appearance. Is there some threshold above
which they can be ignored? Could this lead to performance
improvements (because the hints can be trivially skipped or the
module can avoid loading)?
This is the
Note that this isn't a TrueType font but a CFF, this
is, there are no bytecode instructions at all, and the
TrueType module isn't used. If you don't force the
autohinter, the PS hinter is used instead.
Ah! That is the crucial clue. Our configuration was stripped for use
in an
These questions are a follow up after tinkering with the various hinters
and trying to find which one looks the best for the set of fonts used.
I don't need answers, but I thought people might want to discuss them.
1. My understanding of hints is that they are needed when the font is
small to
No, I haven't. The code used comes from
http://freetype.sourceforge.net/freetype2/docs/reference/ft2-glyph_management.html#FT_Glyph_To_Bitmap
which I assume is a reasonable example to use.
OK.
I'm not sure of the difference between the two codes. It appears to
me that example1.c uses
I'm having problems with the appearance of an otf font. It appears
very differently (principally in size) depending on if
FT_LOAD_NO_AUTOHINT or FT_LOAD_FORCE_AUTOHINT. There is about a
glaring (33%?) height difference.
I've never heard of such a problem.
I am using 2.1.10 on Windows.
My code is basically [...]
Well, I suppose the `basically' is the problem :-) Have you
tried the `example1.c' file from the tutorial?
No, I haven't. The code used comes from
http://freetype.sourceforge.net/freetype2/docs/reference/ft2-glyph_manag
ement.html#FT_Glyph_To_Bitmap which I
10 matches
Mail list logo
