If we can't change the existing function then I agree that a new
one is a good idea, but I would prefer
FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden_By_Weight or something like that to give
an idea of the meaning of the new parameter.
FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden exists only for historial reasons, and is a
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 17:32 -0400, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
I am using FT_Glyphslot_Embolden and so far it seems to work quite
well. However, the default extra boldness (1/24 em) is too great
for my purposes, and ought to be settable via an argument, because
different values are needed at
Dear FreeTypers,
I am using FT_Glyphslot_Embolden and so far it seems to work quite well.
However, the default extra boldness (1/24 em) is too great for my purposes,
and ought to be settable via an argument, because different values are
needed at different times. For example, 1/32 em is adequate
I am using FT_Glyphslot_Embolden and so far it seems to work quite
well. However, the default extra boldness (1/24 em) is too great
for my purposes, and ought to be settable via an argument, because
different values are needed at different times. For example, 1/32 em
is adequate for making
