Re: [Fonts]Re: Saving memory in fontconfig

[Juliusz Chroboczek]

KP This shows sub-linear growth in memory vs the number of fonts; I
KP need to try even larger sets to get a better sense of the actual
KP function here.

Should I take this as meaning that the bitmaps dominate over the
bureaucratic overhead, right?

If so, could you try with 128-codepoint pages?  A significant part of
Unicode is organised into 128-codepoint ranges.

Juliusz
___
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts

Re: [Fonts]Re: Saving memory in fontconfig

[Keith Packard]

Around 7 o'clock on Jun 4, Brian Stell wrote:

 Keith: have you considered sharing whole maps? I have not 
 formally measured this but my impression is that related fonts,
 Arial/Arial-Italic/Arial-Bold/Arial-Bold-Italic, often map the
 same chars. I believe the windows mozilla code does check for
 and share whole maps.

Yes, the sharing is recursive so that fonts which are sharing every page 
end up sharing the top level as well.  That's why the number of CharSets 
is (significantly) less than the number of fonts.

Keith PackardXFree86 Core TeamHP Cambridge Research Lab


___
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts