Summary: | hb_feature_t special values | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | HarfBuzz | Reporter: | Luis de Bethencourt <luis> |
Component: | src | Assignee: | Behdad Esfahbod <freedesktop> |
Status: | RESOLVED MOVED | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | medium | CC: | freedesktop |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
i915 platform: | i915 features: |
Description
Luis de Bethencourt
2013-12-17 19:27:59 UTC
Luis, you are awesome! I'm still thinking about the best name for this, in particular in light of a few API changes I'm going to propose to the list soon. Cool! Looking forward to those. Let me know if I can help, and assign this bug to me once you have decided the best name. Dumping what I have in mind, to replace hb_feature_t. #define HB_CLUSTER_INVALID ((uint32_t) -1) #define HB_RANGE_GLOBAL_START ((unsigned int) 0) #define HB_RANGE_GLOBAL_END ((unsigned int) -1) #define HB_RANGE_GLOBAL {HB_RANGE_GLOBAL_START, HB_RANGE_GLOBAL_END} typedef struct hb_range_t { unsigned int start; unsigned int end; } hb_range_t; typedef struct hb_feature_setting_t { hb_tag_t tag; uint32_t value; } hb_feature_setting_t; Not sure what to do with hb_feature_t. We can either deprecate it and introduce: typedef struct hb_feature_setting_range_t { hb_feature_setting_t setting; hb_range_t range; } hb_feature_range_t; Or deprecate it and make new hb_shape() variation take separate arrays for settings and range. Or ??? |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.