Shaded areas Before and After in the attached figures show where
control points have should be to permit flattening. Is this a risky
change? If anything, it is slightly more conservative, yet the
conditional is quite a bit simpler.
Uh, oh, I have no idea what you are talking about. Please
Of
??? ?
Sent: 11 November 2010 20:23
To: GRAHAM ASHER
Cc: freetype-devel
Subject: Re: [ft-devel] cubic clean up
Shaded areas Before and After in the attached figures show
where control points have should be to permit flattening.
Is this a risky change? If anything, it is slightly more conservative,
yet
I am really annoyed by run-arounds and overzealous protection of code
by authors.
I was proposing a minor benign improvement. I am touching the water so to
speak. What's the big deal? Way to attract developers, freetypers! You go!
___
Freetype-devel
I think I can get though to this guy...
2010/11/12 David Bevan david.be...@pb.com:
I've just had a brief chance to look at your proposal, and I now understand
why it makes no difference to the output. The chances of your relaxed
condition causing a split when the current (theoretically
.
which are at best patronising and at worst impolite.
Best regards,
Graham
- Original Message
From: Алексей Подтележников apodt...@gmail.com
To: freetype-devel freetype-devel@nongnu.org
Sent: Friday, 12 November, 2010 12:16:14
Subject: Re: [ft-devel] cubic clean up
I am really annoyed
freetype-devel@nongnu.org
Sent: Friday, 12 November, 2010 12:16:14
Subject: Re: [ft-devel] cubic clean up
I am really annoyed by run-arounds and overzealous protection of code
by authors.
I was proposing a minor benign improvement. I am touching the water so to
speak. What's the big deal? Way
On 11/12/10 07:56, Алексей Подтележников wrote:
Let's face it. It's only you and me who understand these conditions.
Not really. The rest of us just don't care. Because it's just a Bezier
flattener after all...
No personal attacks on this list. We're grown ups.
behdad
Shaded areas Before and After in the attached figures show
where control points have should be to permit flattening.
Is this a risky change? If anything, it is slightly more conservative,
yet the conditional is quite a bit simpler.
attachment:
There is no gain or loss in speed and the quality is the same
In that case the patch should not be applied. Any change but the very simplest
has some risk. Risk should only be undergone if there is demonstrable benefit.
Graham
- Original Message
From: Алексей Подтележников
