You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It might be useful as a tool to have binaries with direct access to the shaper's internals to prototype views and ideas. Creating a command line app that just takes the font and the text and gives output is trivial, but there are a lot of different options and knobs to tweak the output.
The question is, if rustybuzz were to add equivalents (say rb-shape and rb-view, is it important to follow the same options/interface as much as we can or should it do its own thing?
You can see the different options with $ hb-view --help-all
Hello,
It might be useful as a tool to have binaries with direct access to the shaper's internals to prototype views and ideas. Creating a command line app that just takes the font and the text and gives output is trivial, but there are a lot of different options and knobs to tweak the output.
The question is, if rustybuzz were to add equivalents (say
rb-shapeandrb-view, is it important to follow the same options/interface as much as we can or should it do its own thing?You can see the different options with
$ hb-view --help-all