freetype-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: ftdump can show the CID registry, ordering, and supplement?


From: suzuki toshiya
Subject: Re: ftdump can show the CID registry, ordering, and supplement?
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 02:01:16 +0900
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0

Dear Werner, Alex,

Thank you for positive comment. I fixed my broken comment by Werner's advice.

https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mpsuzuki/ft2demos-mps-wip/-/compare/8a4879f6...2bf378a1


BTW, if the 64kByte array to check CID availability can be
reduced to a 64kBit (= 8kByte for most architecture) array
by a bitshift calculation, is it the way to go?

I think FreeType2 had already dropped the 16-bit platforms,
so the allocation of 64kByte array is not so critical.
But if it is expected, it is possible.

https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mpsuzuki/ft2demos-mps-wip/-/compare/8a4879f6...6172c94b

(the difference of 64kByte code and 8kByte code is: 
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mpsuzuki/ft2demos-mps-wip/-/commit/6172c94b )

How do you think about? I feel it is too complicated.

Regards,
mpsuzuki

On 2023/04/18 22:01, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote:

The execution "ftdump -c" for OpenType/CFF fonts with "holes" in the
implemented CIDs, like Hiragino fonts on macOS, generates the output
ending with:

--------------------------------------------------
(...Charmap printout...),2f9de,2f9df,2f9f4

/CIDSystemInfo dictionary
   Registry:            Adobe
   Ordering:            Japan1
   Supplement:          7

   Implemented CIDs:
     0-20316,21072-21074,21371,21558,21722,21933,22920,23058,23059
--------------------------------------------------


The execution for real CID-keyed font generates the output ending
with:

--------------------------------------------------
(font type entries...)
   underline_thickness: 0

/CIDSystemInfo dictionary
   Registry:            Adobe
   Ordering:            Japan1
   Supplement:          1

   Implemented CIDs:
     0-8359
--------------------------------------------------

Is this what you expected?

This looks very nice, thanks!

Minor issue in a comment:

   * setup 64k-bytes array to scan all CIDs

should be

   * set up 64kByte array to scan all CIDs


    Werner

I like this too. Please commit.

Alexei



reply via email to

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