Re: [ft-devel] suggested improvement to FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden

[Werner LEMBERG]

> If we can't change the existing function then I agree that a new one
> is a good idea, but I would prefer FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden_By_Weight
> or something like that to give an idea of the meaning of the new
> parameter.

OK.

> Obviously the existing function would be re-implemented by a call to
> the new one.

OK.

> By the way, the reason I felt free to change the signature of the
> function was that the header file in the 2.3.4 version seemed to
> imply that it was not yet part of the official API.

Well, yes, but...  David, what do you think?


    Werner