Too many emails with too many comments for me to address them all.
- Swing understands that there's no guarantee that all the pixels fit
in the reported height of the line. I don't think you want to space
out the text so much that you guarantee no glyph overlap. Actually
due to some perhaps questionable choices of the fields in the font
which should be used AND the way that the height of logical
fonts is assembled (the maximum leading of all components +
the maximum descent of all components + the maximum ascent of all
components)
its higher than I'd like. Much as I'd love to fix this its going to
get someone upset,
so I've steered well clear. This goes all the way back to 1.1
And I doubt we'll be able to go changing Swing either.
Irritating as this may, where there are consequences for upstream code
its not something I'd want to sign off on lightly unless its clearly
fixing a blatant bug.
We have less compatibility history to maintain (in the behavioural
sense) in the freetype code
so that's easier to change.
Anything in the shared code, I'd want to actually try out. Any claimed
errors
in the closed code, I'd want to track down and see if its actually so and
what we can/should do about it.
If I have things right, the most obvious problem Mario saw is a negative
value for leading. That could be an incorrect interpretation of sign
somewhere?
Seems like rounding up to get rid of it isn't addressing the real problem
-phil.
On 5/18/2010 2:39 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
Il giorno mar, 18/05/2010 alle 23.33 +0200, Mario Torre ha scritto:
Il giorno mar, 18/05/2010 alle 21.07 +0200, Roman Kennke ha scritto:
Hi Mario,
ly = (jfloat) ROUND(FT26Dot6ToFloat(
scalerInfo->face->size->metrics.height +
bmodifier) + ay - dy);
Just one little note.
Because this is not necessarily just a rounding problem, but it's an
hinting problem, it would be possible to construct a case where this fix
is not enough either.
I'm not so deep into this code (this area in general) to know by
intuition if this is the case or not, or if there's an obvious
alternative, this is another reason I'm pushing a bit for a reply, I
would like to get some insight from the people who wrote this code in
the first place ;)
And yes, I want this fixed in OpenJDK as soon as possible, now that I
know the cause and a possible solution, editing in NetBeans is starting
to be so annoying, makes me feel really bad!!!
Thanks,
Mario
