From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: macos.texi updated Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 17:01:26 +0900 Organization: Faculty of Science, Chiba University Message-ID: References: <8C0A68AE-EF12-4D6C-9879-D0FF3B04DE1B@mac.com> <87r7bhw2o8.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <991DC775-381E-4B96-BBC6-B3701CCD6EAD@cogsci.ucsd.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1129019556 24475 80.91.229.2 (11 Oct 2005 08:32:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 08:32:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 11 10:32:34 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EPFY9-0004kV-Dc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:31:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EPFY7-0001yV-I4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 04:31:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EPF4q-0003KL-9r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 04:01:36 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EPF4m-0003Jt-01 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 04:01:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EPF4j-0003Jl-M3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 04:01:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [133.82.132.2] (helo=mathmail.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1EPF4j-0008Od-14 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 04:01:29 -0400 Original-Received: from church.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp (church [133.82.132.36]) by mathmail.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02F92CB1; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 17:01:26 +0900 (JST) Original-To: Adrian Robert In-Reply-To: <991DC775-381E-4B96-BBC6-B3701CCD6EAD@cogsci.ucsd.edu> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.6 (Marutamachi) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.0.50 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:43858 Archived-At: >>>>> On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 10:53:22 -0400, Adrian Robert said: > In addition, I've been integrating the Cocoa port's font handling > with xfaces.c, and can say it's onerous for developers. All of > these structures and functions concerned with creating, parsing, and > storing the XLFD representation. And you can't avoid using it in a > port (at least, all of my attempts to work around it so far have > failed), so each platform gets to join in the fun. Thus you find the > various functions for faking (and unfaking) them under the two (now > three) non-X platforms. What we need to provide with respect to XLFD in the platform-dependent part is x_list_fonts and x_load_font, whose main components are emulations of XListFonts and XLoadQueryFont. Not so many, I think. Just out of curiosity, what part of them do you think is onerous? Is it missing or oversimplified in the Carbon port? > The only advantage of using a string representation I've seen so far > is doing the regexp match in x_list_fonts. But this is a false > economy -- the extra code to do explicit field-by-field matching on > a struct would be trivial, and far smaller than all of the XLFD > translation and manipulation machinery now in place. The Carbon port has been used the regexp match for XLFD pattern match, but it turned out that almost a half of the startup time was used for that. So, recently it was changed to use more straightforward pattern matching. Yes, it might also be a false economy, but it was much simpler and safer than modifying xfaces.c/fontset.c. Of course, the situation might change in Emacs 23. YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp