On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 10:01 +0200, Marcus Denker wrote: > On 23.09.2008, at 09:09, Andrew Tween wrote: > > > Note that with a one-click app distribution, it isn't necessary to > > embed the fonts in the image. > > FreeType Plus looks for a folder named Fonts relative to the .image > > file, and loads any fonts it finds from there. > > > > Putting the font file(s) into the Fonts folder has these advantages... > > > > 1.The image isn't bloated. (embedding a 20Mb font file would grow > > the image by 20Mb) > > So, the default font could be a large Unicode one, for example > > > > 2.Easier to create a one-click app for distribution. > > > > 3.Easier to install the font files into the OS so that other > > applications can also use them. > > > > 4. Free fonts that don't allow embedding can be used (e.g. > > Bitstream). This widens the choice of available free fonts. > > > > The advantage to embedding the font file in the image is that it > > moves around with the .image file. > > Which for a one-click app isn't really an advantage at all :) > > Cool! > > We should actually think about moving more data into files... for > example, there are huge literal arrays > in UCSTable's class side initialize methods that are only there for > initializing the class a long time ago. > These would not even be needed to be read on startup. > > Of course, this is violently against the "everything in the image" > philosophy of Squeak... but I guess > that any device one would want to run it on would have a filesystem of > some sort. > Or there could be a call that reads it in and keeps it in the image. Easy for people they want to have it in their image.
Norbert _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
