>> And if you have really found a bug, it is a great aid to me for
>> debugging and thus very efficient also – only a failing snippet can
>> *exactly* demonstrate the issue.
>
> No, I don't think I found some bugs. My questions are about
> FreeType use. As long as the documentation describes only the less
> efficient way of FreeType use, I have no other choice than trying
> myself and asking questions.
Unfortunately, I have difficulties to talk about efficiency if I can't
see corresponding C (or C++) code. Maybe somebody else can give you
better advice.
> Ah, BTW, I have a library architecture observation/note:
>
> The structures FTC_ScalerRec and FTC_ImageType are in practice the
> same structure, described in some different way. Then why not to
> join them (add a field .flags to FTC_ScalerRec)?
This is not possible since both structures are public, and for ABI
reasons they can't be changed.[*]
> The same applies for the pairs of functions
> FTC_ImageCache_Lookup/FTC_ImageCache_LookupScaler and
> FTC_SBitCache_Lookup/FTC_SBitCache_LookupScaler.
Ditto.
> And last: In the documentation, I read that "We hope to also provide
> a kerning cache in the near future." Is these plans still alive?
Not really – David Turner, the father of the caching code, no longer
works on FreeType, and my priorities are elsewhere. However, if
someone contributes such code, I will gladly integrate it.
Werner
[*] Well, theoretically they could be changed since the FreeType's
cache interface is still tagged as beta, but I don't see a
convincing reason to do it.
_______________________________________________
Freetype mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype
