[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
|