2015-02-12 13:11 GMT+04:00 Rutledge Shawn <shawn.rutle...@theqtcompany.com>:
> Consequently we have to do conversion each time we need the renderable > text, and/or cache the results to avoid converting repeatedly. Right? > Pnrftm... what? Cache what? And where? I've missed the point... > And we still need to be able to do conversion to renderable glyphs, and > maybe cache them. > Glyphs? Where glyphs came from? > So Unicode is a mini-language which has to be interpreted at some point on > the way to rendering; there’s no pre-interpreted form we could store it > in. TrueType is also a mini-language. Maybe it would be possible to write > a compiler which reads UTF-8 and TrueType and writes (nearly) branch-free > code to render a whole line or block of text, so we could cache code > instead of data. It could be more compact and CPU cache-friendly. I > imagine nobody has done that yet. But then if you think about all the > fancy stuff TeX can do, it could get even more complex than what Qt > currently does. And I don’t understand much about what Harfbuzz does yet, > either. > TrueType doesn't define a codepoint to glyph mapping. In fact, glyph indices for the same codepoints would be different for two arbitrary TT fonts.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development