[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Printing
From: |
Kenichi Handa |
Subject: |
Re: Printing |
Date: |
Mon, 06 Apr 2009 20:47:28 +0900 |
In article <address@hidden>, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <address@hidden> writes:
> Not in the patch, but I can find a similar code in xftfont.c for the
> latter. And maybe
> XFillRectangle (FRAME_X_DISPLAY (f), FRAME_X_WINDOW (f), gc,
> x, y - font->ascent, width, y + font->descent);
> in ftxfont_draw_backgrond (sic) should be
> XFillRectangle (FRAME_X_DISPLAY (f), FRAME_X_WINDOW (f), gc,
> x, y - FONT_BASE (font), width, FONT_HEIGHT (font));
Thank you. I've just fixed them.
> What do you think about the use of GC extension data in the patch? It
> allows us to extract information about clipping rectangles not from
> struct glyph_string but from GC without using a wrapper.
Sorry but I don't have a time to read your code in detail.
Could you explain why using GC extension data is better than
(struct glyphs_string *)->clip?
---
Kenichi Handa
address@hidden
- Re: Printing, (continued)
- Re: Printing, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2009/04/02
- Re: Printing, Kenichi Handa, 2009/04/06
- Re: Printing, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2009/04/06
- Re: Printing,
Kenichi Handa <=
- Re: Printing, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2009/04/06
- Re: Printing, Kenichi Handa, 2009/04/06
- Re: Printing, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2009/04/06
- Future of display engine [Re: Printing], Kenichi Handa, 2009/04/07
- Re: Future of display engine [Re: Printing], YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2009/04/07
- Re: Printing, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2009/04/07
- Re: Printing, Kenichi Handa, 2009/04/07
- Re: Printing, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2009/04/19
Re: Printing, tomas, 2009/04/02