Alexei Podtelezhnikov <[email protected]> wrote: > > Looks good, thanks! How do you check that the new code produces > > identical bboxes? > > I used src/tools/test_bbox.c. I had to add some hexadecimal output, > because the original output was just identical. As you'll see below > the results are not bit-identical. I wish I knew the true answer. One > possibility is to add a third outline to test_bbox with known > theoretical bbox. > > OLD CODE: > [apodtele@prosha ft-test]$ ./bbox > outline #1 > time = 0.13 cbox = [-37.88 535.32 455.89 786.22] > cbox_hex = [FFDA1F9E 021750FF 01C7E381 0312387F] > time = 3.14 bbox = [115.62 535.32 412.08 672.25] > bbox_hex = [00739FDF 021750FF 019C14EE 02A04028] ... > NEW CODE: > [apodtele@prosha ft-test]$ ./bbox > outline #1 > time = 0.13 cbox = [-37.88 535.32 455.89 786.22] > cbox_hex = [FFDA1F9E 021750FF 01C7E381 0312387F] > time = 7.34 bbox = [115.62 535.32 412.08 672.25] > bbox_hex = [00739F5D 021750FF 019C143F 02A03FD5]
You may try to change precision from .2f to print more digits after the point (probably just completely remove the limit). -- Dmitry. _______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
