> However, I am not sure if I completely understand the other thing:
> do you prefer the solution by `N. Yoda' on StackOverflow (1) or the
> solution presented in `fterrors.h' (2)? (the latter uses the array,
> the former uses a switch/case)
I don't care. What I dislike is that the #... lines
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31161284/how-can-i-get-the-corre
sponding-error-string-from-an-ft-error-code
is the best solution
>>>
>>> It is, but the code formatting in the link is extremely ugly and thus
>>> hard to read and understand.
>>
>> What don't you like
>
> Well, the glyphs aren't `loaded'; you are rather collecting the file
> offsets in an array.
>
Yes.
> > It loads glyphs in the increasing order of their character code.
>
> Not necessarily: The order of `char_loc' commands could be arbitrary,
> say,
>
> Character 3: dx 3801088 (58), width
>> GF provides a natural order of glyphs within the font file, we call
>> this `glyph indices'. Each glyph index is associated with a file
>> offset. For each glyph, GF assigns a character code to it. We
>> thus have immediately a mapping from glyph indices to character
>> codes.
>
> My changes
>>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31161284/how-can-i-get-the-corresponding-error-string-from-an-ft-error-code
>>>
>>> is the best solution
>>
>> It is, but the code formatting in the link is extremely ugly and
>> thus hard to read and understand.
>
> What don't you like about the
