Re: [Chicken-users] [PATCH] PDF egg

[Andy Bennett]

Hi,

> Thanks for doing that!
> 
> However, your patch is out of date. It is for version 1.0 of the egg,
> while the current version is 1.0.2. The patch failed on the setup file,
> but the fix was simple. I'm attaching an updated version; you might like
> to check it to see if it looks right.

Hehe... well it was a patch file that had been lurking for a while.
:-)


> 1. I notice the setup file installs *.o files. Is that to enable static
> compilation? If so, I wonder if we really need that?

As Christian mentioned, support for static compilation is in some kind
of limbo. I wasn't aware that it had been officialy deprecated. I
personally like to see object files when it's possible to create them.
It tends to be difficult when extensive use of the FFI is made.
If we're creating them then we should probably continue to. Especially
given the sorry state of the deployment system (which is how one bundles
the shared objects).


> 2. Part of the reason I abandoned the porting effort was that I need a
> PDF library that can embed arbitrary fonts. I was considering adding
> that functionality to the egg, but I looked through the PDF spec and
> never found an explanation of how to obtain the font data to embed
> (though, as you may be aware, it's a thick book, and it's quite possible
> I missed something). It has occured to me that possibly you just open
> the font file and write the bytes into a stream object ... but that
> can't be the whole answer, because there is also subsetting. Do you
> happen to know how that stuff works?

I am unsure about this either. I'd like better font support but didn't
know how to generate those arrays. Have you asked the original author?
Have you tried recreating the existing fonts?





Regards,
@ndy

-- 
address@hidden
http://www.ashurst.eu.org/
0x7EBA75FF