Re: [ft-devel] Transform support for OT-SVG glyphs
> I'm trying to add support for transformations to OT-SVG glyphs. > [...] > > The solution that I have in mind is, let the user pretend that the > glyph is just a traditional one, then we take the transformation > that the user has given and convert it to an equivalent one for the > SVG coordinate system. The conversion will take into account y-axis > inversion as well as the relative scale difference between the two. Starting to read your e-mail, I was immediately going to suggest exactly that. :-) So your idea looks good. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] Fwd: Issue 977845 in chromium: pdf_font_fuzzer: Integer-overflow in compute_glyph_metrics
On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 7:32 PM Nikolaus Waxweiler wrote: > > > Undefined does not mean scary. > > Actually yes. Have you read e.g. > http://blog.llvm.org/2011/05/what-every-c-programmer-should-know_14.html? > Whether with -wrapv or with the unsigned macros, we simply disable some compiler optimizations, perhaps some good optimizations too. Why? Is it because we got scared? There is absolutely no evidence of real bugs in FreeType. It is reasonable to disable optimizations with -wrapv, if scared, but macros are too rigid. Some compilers recognize /* fall through */ comment to suppress particular warnings. I wish we could just add a comment to silence these warnings after adjudication. ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
