On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> wrote: > >> I've picked FT_Err_Raster_Overflow to indicate the boundary. Is >> that appropriate? > > No, it isn't IMHO: FT_Err_Raster_Overflow is a fatal error, indicating > a serious problem which the rasterizer can't manage. I think a simple > integer will serve as return error instead of FT_Error.
Yes, but the drawing functions ultimately inherit the error codes from FT_Glyph_To_Bitmap currently. Therefore it has to be something different from those defined in fterrdef.h to distinguish. It would be good if freetype reserved an FT_Err_User, defined as -1 or 0xFF perhaps, which is not yet taken. _______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
