[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@h
From: |
jonas . hahnfeld |
Subject: |
Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden) |
Date: |
Sat, 02 May 2020 03:22:15 -0700 |
https://codereview.appspot.com/548030043/diff/559960055/lily/general-scheme.cc
File lily/general-scheme.cc (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/548030043/diff/559960055/lily/general-scheme.cc#newcode778
lily/general-scheme.cc:778: free (a);
On 2020/05/02 10:15:40, hanwenn wrote:
> the code mixes setting up the GS instance (memory management etc) with
handling
> the file. Does it have to be this way? Can we have a
>
> class Ghostscript {
> process(string file, string device);
> close();
> };
>
> Ghostscript *get_gs(vector<string> args);
>
> instead?
>
> I think it should be possible to construct the API such that we always
have
> ly:gs , and that it falls back to shelling out to GS if the API is not
> available.
No, because there are two types of arguments when using the API: args
and device_args where the latter is added to command below. This uses a
different syntax and some properties are called differently
(HWResolution vs -r for example).
https://codereview.appspot.com/548030043/
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), (continued)
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/05/01
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), v . villenave, 2020/05/01
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/05/01
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/05/02
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/05/02
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/05/02
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/05/02
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/05/02
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden),
jonas . hahnfeld <=
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/05/02
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/05/02
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/05/02
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/05/03
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/05/03
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/05/03
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/05/03
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/05/06
- Re: Use GhostScript API instead of forking (issue 548030043 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/05/09