https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112989
--- Comment #25 from Telesto <tele...@surfxs.nl> ---
(In reply to Khaled Hosny from comment #24)
> Any meaningful comparison should use Arabic, Indic or other complex scripts.
> The old layout engines had a shortcut for Latin and similar scripts that did
> very simplistic and fast layout, the new engine does not have such shortcuts
> in principle.
I compared it again, with some Arabic text. Slow with the old engine, bit
faster but still slow with the new engine.
> This is not to say our text layout is sub-optimal, it is very sub-optimal
> actually, but that is not a regression. It has always been sub-optimal, we
> were just lying by handling Latin in a special way.
It depends how you interpret a regression. There are multiple sub-types:
a. Regression due a change in the operation system (the code has not changed,
isn't working anymore as expected)
b. A regression between versions of LibreOffice (the behavior changed to the
worse, sec)
c. Technical approach. A unexpected /unintended performance loss.
A/B feel like regressions in the users point of view, but maybe not in the
technical sense of a dev. So it's depending how the keywords are meant (not
clear to me)
Anyway, losing the Latin shortcuts is quite noticeable in quite a lot area's.
(I keep finding new variant). For example large copy/paste actions
I would add it to the tender suggestions. It's quite a core feature. Or an
attempt to find a sponsor for this one :-).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
