From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Split `simple.el'? Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2018 22:45:41 +0300 Message-ID: <83605415lm.fsf@gnu.org> References: <5f1e960c-483f-4902-b4c2-b7a4ca3b04f4@default> <87sh89fsxl.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87o9iw3lak.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <83lge021r1.fsf@gnu.org> <83efjs1nnc.fsf@gnu.org> <83bmew1mu5.fsf@gnu.org> <837epk182x.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1523043871 29241 195.159.176.226 (6 Apr 2018 19:44:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 19:44:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 06 21:44:27 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f4XHe-0007Qn-Jp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 21:44:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50924 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f4XJf-0008CD-1s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:46:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38449) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f4XIy-0008Bc-Jq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:45:49 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f4XIv-0001Tp-Fz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:45:48 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:57145) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f4XIv-0001Tl-D7; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:45:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1712 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1f4XIu-0000ZM-Qo; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:45:45 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:25:55 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:224412 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:25:55 -0400 > > > I have three time as many fonts, and Emacs on Windows checks 2 font > > back-ends before it gives up on characters that don't have any font > > supporting them. > > Does this mean the same 1244 fonts (or a significant subset of them) get > considered twice? Not sure. Font-specs are each checked twice, but I never tried to trace all the fonts to see whether each back-end is tried with each font. I don't think it's a simple N fonts times M back-ends thing, as one of the back-ends is more powerful and supports modern fonts, while the other doesn't.