On 13-09-27 05:03 PM, Jonathan Kew wrote:
> On 27/9/13 19:14, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
>> Thanks Jonathan.  Can you test my alternate approach?  Attached.
> 
> Close, but not quite. Move the statement
> 
>     j++;
> 
> to the very end of the loop -- if you increment it too early, you'll end up
> propagating the first glyph to all the following positions, which is not at
> all what we want!
> 
> With that change, it appears to work as required.

Thanks.  Will do.


> IMO, it's a bit trickier to understand than my version; it should be a bit
> more efficient in the case where (a) space is not available, and (b) there are
> multiple stray ignorables, but that should be such a rare situation that I
> didn't think the performance issue was worth worrying about.
> 
> Anyhow, I'll leave it up to you; either patch should solve the issue.

I'm allergic to O(n^2) code in the shaper...

> JK
> 
> 

-- 
behdad
http://behdad.org/
_______________________________________________
HarfBuzz mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz

Reply via email to