On 20 Jul 2002 21:35:37 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>
> > Some time ago I wrote that I would disable shade size greater than 1 with
> > more then one direction (i.e. force size 1 if there are more than 1
> > direction), because it looks unnaturally bad.
>
> I fail to see what multiple directions are good for in the first
> place. Why would I have a N+S or a S+SE+E shadow?
We are still experimenting, but it seems that in some cases (white fg,
lucidasanstypewriter-14, offset 0) S+SW or SE+S+SW looks better than SW.
But not with the old way of handling of sizes greater than 1.
> > Starting from yesterday xft fonts with shadow are very slow.
>
> Any shadows or just the ones using "all"? If this happens only
> with "all", see above. If not, please add a debug statement
> around line 437 in Fft.c:
>
> fprintf(stderr, "\n");
> while (FlocaleGetShadowTextPosition(&xt, &yt, &gstp_args))
> {
> fprintf(stderr, "fftds: fgstp returned %d %d\n", xt, yt);
> DrawStringFunc(fftdraw, &fft_fgsh, uf, xt, yt, str, len);
> }
Yes, with "all" shadow texts were printed twice. It is fixed now.
It is still impossibly slow with wide menus and "Shadow=2 center:xft...".
Regards,
Mikhael.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
