[squeak-dev] Re: How to compile FreeType Plugin (FT2Plugin)?

Juan Vuletich juan at jvuletich.org
Fri Mar 21 10:20:23 UTC 2008


Andreas Raab wrote:
> Juan Vuletich wrote:
>
>> - 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).

It is just a fix. Why should StrikeFonts break with more than 1 bpp? 
BTW, if there is some bug left, it should be fixed, shouldn't it?
>
> 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.

I don't agree. The "assumption" that StrikeFonts are 1 bpp is not 
documented. And it doesn't make sense anyway.
>
>> - 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.

I don't see in what they differ from StrikeFonts.
>
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas
>
>
>

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list