[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL
From: |
GRAHAM ASHER |
Subject: |
Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL |
Date: |
Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:45:10 +0100 (BST) |
Alexei,
I don't have much time or energy for this at the moment - sorry. Of course I
will be looking at it again, but I believe that the solution hammered out by
David Bevan and myself is a good one - it solves the bug I introduced while
retaining the speed increases I first made the changes for.
Please note that the definition of FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION as 16 gives a value
of
1/4, not 1/16 as you suggest. This code works in units of 1/64 of a pixel.
Best regards,
Graham
----- Original Message ----
From: Алексей Подтележников <address@hidden>
To: freetype-devel <address@hidden>
Sent: Wednesday, 13 October, 2010 2:25:40
Subject: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL
Guys,
Currently smooth/ftgrays.c contains this:
/* The maximum distance of a curve from the chord, in 64ths of a pixel; */
/* used when flattening curves. */
#define FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION 16
and this:
/* must be at least 6 bits! */
#define PIXEL_BITS 8
#define ONE_PIXEL ( 1L << PIXEL_BITS )
Wouldn't that make sense to reconcile the two and
possibly just use an explicit fraction of ONE_PIXEL instead?
If I am not confused FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION could be replaced
with a larger value. 16 / 256th is really very conservative and
you still make too many splits.
Also, s and s_limit actually mean some sort of an area measure.
It would make perfect sense to use TArea as type of these variables.
Finally, I have more "geometrical" suggestions, but I'll wait with the patch,
until I hear back Re this and my previous message.
Best,
Alexei
_______________________________________________
Freetype-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
- [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, Алексей Подтележников, 2010/10/12
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL,
GRAHAM ASHER <=
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, Алексей Подтележников, 2010/10/13
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, GRAHAM ASHER, 2010/10/13
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/10/13
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, Алексей Подтележников, 2010/10/13
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, James Cloos, 2010/10/14
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, Алексей Подтележников, 2010/10/14
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/10/14
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, James Cloos, 2010/10/14
- Re: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/10/15
- RE: [ft-devel] FT_MAX_CURVE_DEVIATION vs ONE_PIXEL, David Bevan, 2010/10/14