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 chec
Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
>
> 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?
K
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 page
Around 10 o'clock on May 30, Keith Packard wrote:
> I think I'll convert the branches to a packed representation and take the
> performance hit when searching. That should reduce memory usage for
> the branches from 664320 to 32403 bytes. I'll take the performance hit
> for the 630K savings;
