>> Great! ... Have you compared with, say, a floating point
>> implementation which returns bboxes with really high precisions?
>
> I anticipated this question.
Hehe :-)
> Why would you compare with theoretical results when your rasterizer
> uses discrete and less accurate bisections? Shouldn't you compare
> with the rendering results? One way or the other 3/64 of a pixel is
> really small difference.
Well, your results differ from the original ones. I don't know
whether it differs to the better or to the worse (and, admittedly, I
don't know how good the bboxes computed with the original FreeType
code actually are). This is my only concern.
Given that bboxes are of really great importance, and that even
smallest rounding errors (to integers) can cause clipping, a
comparison to high-precision results is probably good, regardless of
the old or new code.
Werner
_______________________________________________
Freetype-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
