At Thu, 26 Apr 2001 14:05:35 +0900,
Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
>
> > Another problem: the number of fonts and the index for the default
> > font specified in defaultfont.h (XX_NFONTS and XX_FONT0 where XX is
> > the encoding used) will always apply whatever the number of fonts
> > specified by resource files. For instance, if the encoding is "gb",
> > only 2 font sizes will be available at runtime, regardless of whether
> > resources fontN and mfontN are defined or not for N>1.
>
> Oh, this is caused by a bad design of my previous patch.
> font0_idx and nfonts must be configurable.
This is one possibility indeed. Another one which avoids having to
create new resource variables is to revert to having them fixed to
some reasonable value (like say, 3 or 4 for font0_idx and 7 for
nfonts), and define the runtime font size range dynamically depending
of whether resource values are specified or not for respective
indices. Undefining resource values when there exist hard-coded
defaults should be allowed too (so that it is also possible to
restrict the range).
> > Also, the
> > default font will have to be the smaller one. I don't think these
> > limitations are correct behavior.
>
> Are you saying about 16x8 and 16x16 pixel fonts in GB encoding?
> I thought it is popular because these fonts are included in XFree86
> distribution. If there are other free GB2312 fonts popular in China
> and Chinese people prefer them, they may be used as a default.
As far as I am concerned, your selection of default fonts is actually
very appropriate. I was just using the example of gb encoding to point
out the inconvenience of having font0_idx fixed to 0...
/***************************
Maxime Froment
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
***************************/
