>> Currently, it's exactly the opposite in FreeType's code
>
> Well. This is what I see in that data structure that I shared
> yesterday privately. If "17" is just a rumor, than I would go with
> my more solid source.
Something...
>> > PUSHB and PUSHW seems to pop one too, which I do not quite get.
>>
>> Where do you see that?
>>
>
> Who would have thought, right? This is in that data structure.
> Perhaps they want consistency with NPUSHB and NPUSHW. I would love
> to confirm that.
...is fishy. PUSHB and PUSHW *definitely* don't pop something.
Werner
_______________________________________________
Freetype-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
