Date: Fri Aug 12 2005 - 05:51:41 CEST
Hi Martin,
Thanks for your help. Those answers will make it much easier to finalise
the patch to #9240.
> If you have evidence that the characters are being positioned in a different
> way, I'd very much like to see it. It would be a fantastic fix if we can
> manage it.
I'm not sure about being positioned in a different way, but I certainly
have evidence the measureString() underestimates the actual string length.
The code for measureString() appears to fetch the width of each glyph and
then sum them for the width of the string. I'm guessing that this neglects
any space (kerning?) between the characters when they are actually displayed.
Whatever the reason though, the returned value seems to be too small.
Take a look at the attached screenshot. This is obtained by adding to following
lines to the AP_Preview_Paragraph::draw() function.
UT_UCS4String str= "This is an averagely long test string";
UT_UTF8String width = UT_UTF8String_sprintf("GR_Graphics thinks the string is %d pixels wide.", m_gc->tdu(m_gc->measureString(str.ucs4_str(), 0, str.size(), NULL)));
painter.drawChars(str.ucs4_str(), 0, str.size(), 100, 100);
painter.drawChars(width.ucs4_str().ucs4_str(), 0, width.size(), 100, 1000);
return;
measureString() returns 140, but the actual width of the string on the
screen is 233.
> Will you commit the patch to fix the names of Chinese fonts before 2.5?
Do you think I should? It's quite a big fix. I worried it might introduce
regressions if committed just before the 2.4 release.
Best wishes,
R.
