Follow-up Comment #7, bug #67544 (group groff):

On Wednesday, 28 January 2026 02:57:25 GMT G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Follow-up Comment #6, bug #67544 (group groff):
> 
> At 2026-01-27T18:33:14-0500, Deri James wrote:
> [snip]
> 
>> Of course the actual glyph shapes are identical because the glyphs for
>> both TR and U-TR come from the same URW font. So, I did a  third run,
>> again no kerning, but ne-TR.pdf produced via grops->ghostscript. This
>> time there is a visible difference - but not to the glyph shapes, just
>> a very slight vertical shift. This is likely to be a rounding issue,
>> grops uses 2 decimals gropdf 3 decimals rounded, don't know what
>> ghostscript uses. The fact it repeats every 4 lines points towards
>> rounded calculation landing on pixel boundaries when the glyphs are
>> filled.
> 
> I'm intrigued.  Do you think it's worth trying to increase the precision
> of grops's calculations?  Or is this limitation on significant figures
> imposed on us by the PostScript file format?
> 
I was wrong. Grops and gropdf both round to 3dp. So I investigated, see 
attached file.

Cheers

Deri 

(file #58171)

    _______________________________________________________

Additional Item Attachment:

Name: ne-Results.pdf                 Size: 7.6KiB
    <https://file.savannah.gnu.org/file/ne-Results.pdf?file_id=58171>


    AGPL NOTICE

These attachments are served by Savane. You can download the corresponding
source code of Savane at
https://savannah.gnu.org/source/savane-6b2625aec4545b4d5e8a6fb7de471115e8a8be6d.tar.gz


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?67544>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to