On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 01:48:54 UTC, Jason C. Wells
wrote:
I'm not sure I fully understand name mangling, but it looks
like nanovg wants to use iv\stb\ttf.d from it's own source
tree. But Ketmar said "p.s. you will also need stb_ttf port,
arsd repo has it under the name "ttf.d"."
So which ttf.d should I use? Does it matter?
it really doesn't, but you should have only one. ;-) the idea is
that nanovg tries to import several stb_truetype ports (including
iv.freetype bindings) and will use the first one that imported
successfully. it is, again, works nice with rdmd and full IV
repo, but may fail if you'll pass Adam's ttf.d in command line,
while there is iv.ttf accessible on the disk. in this case
importing of iv.ttf will succeed, but the code will be generated
for arsd.ttf. oops.
Perhaps Ketmar intended to remove his copy of ttf.d from his
repo?
quite the contrary. ;-) if anything resides in IV, then it is
preferred thing to use with any IV modules. i strongly suggest
you to move to rdmd, it can do most of such things for you. ;-)
as for nanovg, the preferred is iv.freetype, actually. then
iv.ttf, then arsd.ttf. btw, you can find me on IRC channel (and
Adam too), and ask your questions in real-time (well, if we are
online ;-).
