Re: [ft-devel] FreeType Amalgamation first draft
It works! Awesome! Thank you Vinnie! One question: my application normally includes ftoutln.h, for directly calling FT_Outline_Render(), etc. With FreeTypeAmalgam.h and FreeTypeAmalgam.c, I don't include ftoutln.h and I get: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘FT_Outline_Render’ In spite of the warning, it seems to compile and run correctly. Any suggestion on how to obtain the declarations that are normally in ftoutln.h? Thanks again and best wishes, Tom On Feb 21, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Vinnie wrote: > Well here it is, an amalgamated version of FreeType. It compiles, links, and > functions correctly in my host application (which was previously linking with > a version of FreeType built as a static library from the full source tree on > my machine). This is only a first draft, plenty of rough edges here (but it > works!) > > http://code.google.com/p/amalgamate/source/browse/#svn%2Ftrunk%2FFreeType > > Just two files, FreeTypeAmalgam.h and FreeTypeAmalgam.c > > ___ > Freetype-devel mailing list > Freetype-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel > 文林 Wenlin Institute, Inc.Software for Learning Chinese E-mail: wen...@wenlin.com Web: http://www.wenlin.com Telephone: 1-877-4-WENLIN (1-877-493-6546) ☯ ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] FreeType patches to support amalgamation
> Putting the prefix or postfix to all names, we can avoid the > conflicts, but it makes the names longer, and it makes the sources > eye-unfriendly (especially for the die-hard VT100 emulator users > like me). I usually strictly enforce a 78 character per line limit, so I also want to avoid overly long identifiers. Fortunately, the suggested changes from Vinnie are non-intrusive IMHO and surprisingly minor. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] FreeType patches to support amalgamation
Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Using anything but a shared library for FreeType just seems to be begging > for pain [...] Unlike many high-profile packages, Freetype is also used on (mostly embedded) platforms where shared libraries just do not exist. Also if some vendor has a design which, perhaps for historic reasons, do not include shared libraries, to make a single exception for Freetype will not ease substantially her updating pain. And forcing a design change to use shared libraries all over the place is often an order of magnitude more complex (and more expensive.) Antoine ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] FreeType patches to support amalgamation
Hi, For first, I state that I have no objection against the decision by Werner, because now the time he spends for the maintenance of FreeType2 (in official branch) is longer than those of other FreeType2 developers (maybe except of David Turner). But, if I just talk about the idea to change program source files, to prevent the conflict of the name of types, functions, and variables, I feel a sympathy with Alexei. Also some temporal macro functions must be cared. Putting the prefix or postfix to all names, we can avoid the conflicts, but it makes the names longer, and it makes the sources eye-unfriendly (especially for the die-hard VT100 emulator users like me). It is good idea to consider the conflict of inter-source names from the beginning of a software design, but, changing the existing source files designed without inter-source name conflict is painful work. # there are some macros that are just designed to reduce # the length of a line, something like, # #define GET_A_PLACE_IN_CA( a ) ( earth->america->north_america->usa->california->a ) I wish if there is some program to convert a group of source files to "conflict-free" source files by inserting the prefix/postfixes. If there is such, all developers who are asked to support the concatenated source can reduce their efforts. I'm unfamiliar with C source parsers that can pickup the names and filter them correctly (if anybody knows, please let me know!), so I could not propose another option to support Vinnie's request, thus, I must follow the decision by Werner. Regards, mpsuzuki Werner LEMBERG wrote: >> How about a shared header file if those modules share a structure? >> Don't you see that this patch set is just a pile of pure stinking >> crap??? > > Alexei, your comments are at the border of insults. Please don't do > that! We already know that you don't like the patches. It doesn't > help at all if you repeat this again and again. > > You have always the possibility to maintain a branch without these > patches applied. > > > Werner > > ___ > Freetype-devel mailing list > Freetype-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
