Igor Stasenko wrote:
> My humble 2 cents.
> Fonts require a complete refactoring:
> - in a ways how font interacts with canvas
> - in a ways how font interacts with primitives (if any)
> - use more simplified approach for rendering

I disagree. Look at AbstractFont and tell me what is complicated about 
it, or how it should interact differently with canvas or how it could 
use a "more simplified" approach for rendering. Fonts in Squeak are 
trivial - they have a tiny protocol to install, measure and display text 
and that protocol is fundamentally sound. It is *very* easy to create a 
new subclass of Font and have it your way. What is messed up in Squeak 
isn't fonts, it's TextStyle, Paragraph, and CharacterScanner.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

> 
> On 21/03/2008, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
>> Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>  > - The  memory consumption estimation you made was with the form that is
>>  > used to build the fonts. The forms actually stored in the fonts are
>>  > smaller. The fonts I included go from 1293 * 11 to 2917 * 33.
>>
>>
>> If we average this (is that fair?) it would come out to:
>>
>>    2100 "width" * 22 "height" * 4 "depth" * 5 "fonts" * 5 "sizes" * 32
>>  "derived"
>>
>>  => 147,840,000
>>
>>
>>  > - My code is just a small fix to StrikeFonts. As such, I think it
>>  > belongs in any official release.
>>
>>
>> Uhm, no, not really. It's a new feature not a fix. As such, it should be
>>  treated with some caution. I'm not saying that it can't be included but
>>  there are some aspects about it that make me feel very uneasy (for
>>  example the whole kadoodle in Grafport - I'm virtually certain that
>>  there will be situations where this is wrong).
>>
>>  As a matter of fact I'd probably vote for leaving StrikeFont completely
>>  alone and introduce a new font subclass for these guys. It makes clear
>>  where the assumptions are and the extension points for fonts are by now
>>  defined well-enough that these fonts could be one loadable option.
>>
>>
>>  > - There are four (that I know) advanced approach to fonts for Squeak:
>>  > TTCFont, FreeType, Cairo / Rome and Pango. It makes sense to me to
>>  > include StrikeFonts (including my 32bit fix) in a basic official image,
>>  > with a really small set of fonts. Then the developer can choose an
>>  > advanced font package if needed, taking into account that TTCFont needs
>>  > way more memory than 32 bit StrikeFonts (due to color glyph cache) and
>>  > that the other options need specific plugins.
>>
>>
>> It makes more sense to me if your fonts are one of the loadable options
>>  from Squeakmap. Then people can decide whether they want one, the other,
>>  or both.
>>
>>  Cheers,
>>
>>    - Andreas
>>
>>
> 
>