Lee Brown wrote:
> 2) Global wrapper lib
> I gave this a try and I'm not sure this is the way to go. I think adding a
>wrapper
> doesn't add much functionality and could ultimately limit what the user can
>accomplish rather
> than enhance it because everything has to go through the wrapper. The wrapper might
>be
> incomplete or fit poorly with different libraries. No doubt that it would seem
>"cleaner",
> but I couldn't get this to work to my satisfaction.
this is exactly my argument why I think there should be no GGI wrapper around Freetype,
but a GGI renderer backend for freetype. It's more modular, not intrusive to GGI, and
generally
guarantees a better decoupling between both projects.
> 4) PrintGlyph vs PrintChar
> Yes. A font has two ways of looking up the character. a)(PrintChar) the
>character
> code (ascii, unicode...), b) (PrintGlyph)the index of the array of characters.
are you assuming that there is a one-to-one mapping between glyphs and characters ?
Unicode is a pretty complex standard, and there are various reasons why you can't
assume
such a mapping. The simplest one is kerning and ligatures, i.e. to render (and before
that,
layout) glyphs correctly, you need to know the adjacent glyphs, or even, you have a
single
glyph ("ffi") as a composite.
Regards, Stefan
_______________________________________________________
Stefan Seefeld
Departement de Physique
Universite de Montreal
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________________
...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
