[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ft-devel] ft-smooth for 2.1.10?
From: |
like2wise |
Subject: |
RE: [ft-devel] ft-smooth for 2.1.10? |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Dec 2005 16:23:17 +0100 |
Hello David,
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:19:56 +0100, "Turner, David" <address@hidden>
said:
> > Now, there is also the compile-time configuration from
> > ftconfig.h which
> > confuses me a bit in combination with the above:
> >
> What do you mean ?
>
Sorry, I meant 'ftoption.h' and I will try to re-state my question:
The auto-hinter, is that the one being compiled-in when
TT_CONFIG_OPTION_UNPATENTED_HINTING is defined?
Or, is the auto-hinter a different beast?
Also, is the doc around TT_CONFIG_OPTION_UNPATENTED_HINTING still
correct, with respect to the
FT_PARAM_TAG_UNPATENTED_HINTING remark?
/* Define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER if you want to compile
*/
/* a bytecode interpreter in the TrueType driver. Note that there are
*/
/* Define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_UNPATENTED_HINTING (in addition to
*/
/* TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER) to compile the unpatented
*/
/* work-around hinting system. Note that for the moment, the
algorithm */
/* is only used when selected at runtime through the parameter tag
*/
/* FT_PARAM_TAG_UNPATENTED_HINTING; or when the debug hook
*/
/* FT_DEBUG_HOOK_UNPATENTED_HINTING is globally activated.
*/
/*
*/
#define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_UNPATENTED_HINTING
Regards,
Leon.
RE: [ft-devel] ft-smooth for 2.1.10?, Turner, David, 2005/12/20
RE: [ft-devel] ft-smooth for 2.1.10?, Turner, David, 2005/12/20
RE: [ft-devel] ft-smooth for 2.1.10?, Turner, David, 2005/12/20
RE: [ft-devel] ft-smooth for 2.1.10?, Turner, David, 2005/12/20
- RE: [ft-devel] ft-smooth for 2.1.10?,
like2wise <=
RE: [ft-devel] ft-smooth for 2.1.10?, Turner, David, 2005/12/20