Hi Sebastien, On 02/23/11 12:57, Sebastien Metrot wrote: > Hello Behdad, > > If you plan to add a dependency to glib, do you think there is a way to make > that optional? I already use an alternative implementation of the bidi > algorithm (UCPGA, "Pretty Good Bidi Algorithm", from the UCData lib) and I'd > rather not have to deal with glib as it is notoriously hard to build on non > unix platforms. I confess, however, that I have no idea how it compares to > fribidi.
Right. That's the kind of feedback I was looking for. But, if I don't use glib (and FriBidi if we decide that we want full bidi in hb-view), then your build on non-unix will be only partially functional unless you have hb-view yourself to add your own UCData and bidi. I'll try to keep the glib use to the minimum. behdad > Regards, > > S. > > > On Feb 23, 2011, at 12:17 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> As promised, I pushed out the initial code for a hb-view cmdline tool. >> There's a thousand things missing right now, but it's a good start. >> >> In particular, in the near future I want to do: >> >> - Somehow be able to set script and direction. For script, I'm currently >> thinking about making harfbuzz internally scan for the first non-Common >> script >> in the string if the buffer script is set to HB_SCRIPT_COMMON. That should >> work fairly well for simple cases. For direction, it's harder. HarfBuzz >> internally knows about native horizontal direction of scripts, so I like to >> be >> able to use that. However, that would require adding either >> HB_DIRECTION_NONE >> or HB_DIRECTION_WEAK_LTR/RTL/.... I can't make up my mind about this. >> Suggestions? >> >> An alternative would be to 1) add a full-fledged script iterator to HarfBuzz, >> 2) use FriBidi to do real bidi. That would make the tool much more usable at >> the cost of requiring FriBidi. >> >> - Add support for PS/PDF/SVG output. >> >> - Port to glib option parsing. Hopefully people don't mind the glib use, >> right? >> >> >> Also a design question: should the tool require all the ingredients >> (freetype, >> cairo, glib, fribidi?) and do a perfect job, or if some ingredients are >> missing it should just use fallbacks, which would result in inferior output? >> For example, if glib is missing, you wouldn't get the Unicode funcs, if >> fribidi missing, no bidi. I'm leaning towards always-correct output. Makes >> the tool much easier to use as a debugging tool. >> >> Later on, perhaps add json/xml output too. Or would that be better done in a >> separate tool? >> >> Any other comments? >> >> Cheers, >> behdad >> _______________________________________________ >> HarfBuzz mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz > > _______________________________________________ HarfBuzz mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
