freetype-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CFF driver fixed (Re: misalignment with DEC Unix.)


From: Tom Kacvinsky
Subject: Re: CFF driver fixed (Re: misalignment with DEC Unix.)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:34:56 -0400 (EDT)

Well, well, well...  This ROCKS!  The OpenType CJKV fonts I have
laying around here at the AMS all work very well.

Unfortunately, I am still getting the mis-aligned access messages for
the DEC Unix compile.  Note that I don't get a core dump unless I
force it; the kernel normally just spews tons of unaligned access
errors to stderr.  Bleah!

Tom

On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, David Turner wrote:

> Hello,
> 
>   I'm glad to let you know that the CFF driver is now fixed
>   and supports CID-keyed fonts correctly :-)
> 
>   The "unexpected crash" and various misalignment problem came
>   from a bug in the CFF parser (namely, the definition of the
>   T2_FIELD_DELTA was incorrect).
> 
>   The "zero advance width" problem was due to a really mundane
>   bug too in the glyph loader...
> 
>   I have only tried it with STSong-Light-Acro, but it seems to
>   run well. I welcome any comments :-)
> 
>   The list of font formats supported by FreeType 2 is now:
> 
>     - TrueType
>     - Type 1
>     - Type 1 Multiple Masters
>     - Type 1 CID-keyed
>     - OpenType/CFF
>     - OpenType/CFF CID-keyed
> 
>   I'll probably add support to pure CFF + the new Adobe SVG "CEF" font
>   format soon..
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> - David
> 
> 
> PS: For the technicaly inclined, the macro definition now reads:
> 
> #undef  T2_FIELD_DELTA
> #define T2_FIELD_DELTA( code, name, max )                    \
>         {                                                    \
>           t2_kind_delta,                                     \
>           code | T2CODE,                                     \
>           (FT_UInt)(char*)&T2_REF( T2TYPE, name ),           \
>           sizeof( T2_REF( T2TYPE, name )[0] ),               \
>           0,                                                 \
>           max,                                               \
>           (FT_UInt)(char*)&T2_REF( T2TYPE, num_ ## name )    \
>         },
> 
> instead of the previous:
> 
> #undef  T2_FIELD_DELTA
> #define T2_FIELD_DELTA( code, name, max )                    \
>         {                                                    \
>           t2_kind_delta,                                     \
>           code | T2CODE,                                     \
>           (FT_UInt)(char*)&T2_REF( T2TYPE, name ),           \
> >>>>>>>>  sizeof( T2_REF( T2TYPE, name ) ),               \
>           0,                                                 \
>           max,                                               \
>           (FT_UInt)(char*)&T2_REF( T2TYPE, num_ ## name )    \
>         },
> 
> Pretty stupid things, with causes an invalid pointer typecast
> later..
> 
> Tom Kacvinsky a écrit :
> > 
> > Well, the Linux crashing bug is fixed, and I am going to attempt
> > a new DEC compile.  What was the problem?  I couldn't find it...
> > 
> > The CFF/CID stuff is coming along nicely.  The glyphs still image over one
> > another, but I no longer get invalid subr. # errors.  Which is good.
> > 
> > Tom
> > 
> > On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, David Turner wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Tom,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 140000190 140000192 140000192 140000194 6
> > > >
> > > > It would appear that I am mistaken.  If I change the short to char, I 
> > > > get this
> > > > output:
> > > >
> > > > 140000190 140000191 140000191 140000192 3
> > > >
> > > > Silly me.  But I know casting is one thnig that can cause mis-alignment.
> > > > I'll try to find an example...
> > > >
> > > Seems normal there. Casting can cause mis-alignment when it is done
> > > incorrectly (which means a bug in the code, rather than a specific
> > > nastiness of 64-bit systems, and I'd say that I prefer that than having
> > > to review all of FreeType's code :-)
> > >
> > > Thanks for the output, I'm still trying to find the bug(s)..
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > - David
> > >
> > > > Tom
> > >
> 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]