Yes, I used the grayscale hinting setting for a few reasons. Perhaps
I'm not completely understanding what I am doing, but my reasons were this:
- Currently in Freetype, there is a setting for grayscale vs. bi-level
TT hinting, however in reality there exists only TT bi-level hinting.
In other words, there is no difference in how the TT interpreter renders
the outlines when grayscale is set versus bi-level (but maybe I'm wrong
here). The difference between grayscale and bi-level only comes into
place during the rasterization. So, since grayscale mode can more
closely represent the subpixel hinting than bi-level hinting can, it
made sense to me to have it replace the existing grayscale TT hinting
(which is in fact just bi-level TT hinting).
- There is currently no "subpixel-hinting" flag that freetype/fontconfig
can use, so until that could be put into place, replacing grayscale
would allow this patch to do something during the interim.
- It can easily be changed, so I figured there was no harm. ;)
I intended on separating subpixel out from grayscale, just not in this
version of the patch. You are absolutely correct that it should be 3
different modes.
Basically, all of your code looks very clean and promising. However,
it seems that you (completely?) replace the current gray-level hinting
stuff with cleartype-like hinting. Is this intended? Shouldn't this
be three different `modes'? Bi-level, standard gray-level, and
cleartype-like?
_______________________________________________
Freetype mailing list
Freetype@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype
