Re: C++ question:

[David Kastrup]

Knut Petersen <address@hidden> writes:

>> Uh, you set the dimensions to 0,0 _after_ moving the thing to its place.
>> That would make the remaining point stick out seriously wide of the
>> actual glyph.  Maybe move the set_empty before the translate_axis?
>
> Not even the following code shows any improvement:
>
>   Stencil total;
>   for (int i = 0; i < hyphens; i++)
>     {
>       Stencil ds = dash_stencil;
>       ds.translate_axis (span_points[LEFT] + start_space +
>                          i * (dash_period + dash_length), X_AXIS);
>       total.add_stencil (ds);
>       if (whiteout > 0.0 )
>         {
>           Box wb (Interval (0, dash_length + 2 * whiteout * lt),
>                   Interval (h - whiteout * lt, h + th + whiteout * lt));
>           Stencil ws;
>           ws.set_empty(false);
>           ws = (Lookup::round_filled_box (wb, 0.8 * lt));
>           ws.set_empty(false);
>           ws = ws.in_color (1.0, 0.0, 0.0);
>           ws.translate_axis (span_points[LEFT] + start_space + i * 
> (dash_period
>                              + dash_length) - whiteout * lt, X_AXIS);
>           ws.set_empty(false);
>           total.add_stencil (ws);
>           total.set_empty(false);
>         }
>     }
>
>   total.translate_axis (-me->relative_coordinate (common, X_AXIS), X_AXIS);
>   total.set_empty(false);
>   return total.smobbed_copy ();
> }

Sigh.  Why do you use set_empty _after_ translation?  That makes the
remaining point stick out from the actual glyph.  And of course, it
totally moots any effect of set_empty before translation.

-- 
David Kastrup