On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 7:34 AM Moazin Khatri <moazinkha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Yes, yes. This needs documentation with hook prototypes described and >> the presets demonstrated with examples. > > Please have a look at this document: > https://bitbucket.org/moazin/freetype-docs/src/master/hooks.md > > Also look at the comments I just added in my `librsvg' port. > https://bitbucket.org/moazin/librsvg-port-freetype-otsvg/src/master/port/rsvg_port.c
It would be nice interface to have IFF FreeType did not have the renderer module interface. You have to implement (and maintain) hooks instead of maintaining renderer modules. You are asking secondary libraries to implement hooks instead of the renderer module. There is nothing absolutely nothing easier, or more logical, or simpler. It buys you absolutely nothing!!! They are just an extra unnecessary layer. I don't buy the arguments about maintaining cost: you now have the whole new interface to look after. Given that hooks do not exist and have to be implemented, my question remains. Why hooks are better than modules? Werner, why? I would be more happy with a single module for a single library (just make a choice already!) without any of these hooks. Then we can decide later once other libraries want to be supported. _______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
