RE: [Freetype] VxWorks(WIndML) Version

[Chris Hertrich]

Somesh -

We have done all the integration work into WindMl within our eTTF product
for VxWorks applications.

Chris

eTTF is a font driver developed for WindML 3.0 that seamlessly integrates
the Freetype 2.1.3 font engine.  Since the WindML 3.0 API has been completed
adhered to, eTTF can be installed into any WindML 3.0 build.  Moreover, all
existing applications, including packages operating on top of WindML such as
Jworks, will continue to work as before.

Caching

eTTF uses two forms of caching: UGLBits and Image Cache.  UGLBits is a PSA
developed custom caching module for Freetype.  UGLBits was derived from the
Freetype stock caching module Sbits.  UGLBits caches non-rotated,
non-scaled, device dependent bitmaps (DDBs) under 48 pixels (both height and
width).  The Image Cache, standard with Freetype, is used in eTTF to cache
glyph data greater than or equal to 48 pixels (height or width).  In
addition, if rotation or scaling is desired, the Image Cache caching mode is
used.

Performance and memory usage

UGLBits yields the best performance since the DDB data is cached.  Once the
glyph has been cached it’s simply a matter of fetching and blitting it to
the display.  The larger the glyph, the more memory is used.  Using the
anti-aliasing feature requires additional memory to cache the monochrome
mask and device independent bitmap data.  This is over and above the
transparent DDB that is created from these two components.

Image Cache is the slower of the two caching modes.  Since only the vector
data is cached, the driver must generate a device independent bitmap (DIB)
on each glyph request.  The DIB must then be converted to the appropriate
DDB format.  Once the DDB has been blitted to the display it is freed.

Product Highlights
WindML font driver for the FreeType engine, including:

Configurable in the WindML GUI
Supports font file compression
Anti-aliasing
Rotation
Scaling
Autohinting
Small Driver Footprint: 15K max
Small Engine Footprint: 373K with all modules included, smaller based on
configuration
Source code

Supported Font Types:
TrueType
Type 1
CID-keyed Type 1
BDF
OpenType
X11 PCF
Windows FNT
PFR

Requirements
VxWorks Version 5.4 w/Tornado
WindML 2.0 or later

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden
> Behalf Of Wadhwa, Somesh
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 7:50 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: RE: [Freetype] VxWorks(WIndML) Version
>
>
> Hello David.
> I believe you when you say that it will compile on any platform
> with an ANSI
> C compiler. However, for it to work on Windml there has to be some
> intergration work done. Windml has a defined interface which a font engine
> must adhere to for it work correctly. I am curious if someone has already
> writen it.
> Somesh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Turner [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 7:17 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Freetype] VxWorks(WIndML) Version
>
>
> Wadhwa, Somesh wrote:
> > Hello again, I am still curious if anyone has been successful in
> > getting freetype to work with Windml. Any help would be appreciated.
> > Somesh
> >
> Ang again, FreeType is very portable and should compile easily
> out-of-the-box on any platform with an ANSI C compiler. There are
> at least 3
> different ways to build it, as described in docs/BUILD.
>
> If the two first automatic methods do not work, you can still try
> manually.
>
> Have you tried it. Did you encounter any problems ?
>
> Regards,
>
> - David Turner
> - The FreeType Project  (www.freetype.org)
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pedriana, Paul [mailto:address@hidden
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 12:40 PM
> > To: address@hidden
> > Subject: RE: [Freetype] Font Fusion vs. Freetype?
> >
> >
> > People comparing these libraries for consideration of use are
> > concerned with things other than just rendering quality. Features,
> > cost support, footprint, runtime stability, and API stability are all
> > important considerations. In fact, in the end I'd guess that rendering
> > quality is going to be the least of many users' considerations, given
> > that all these libraries have good quality output.
> >
> > FontFusion looks good to game companies because they claim to run with
> > a very small footprint, especially with asian fonts. This is important
> > to game companies making console (e.g. PlayStation) games.
> >
> > Additionally, one issue I've had with Freetype is that the API keeps
> > changing. Practically every revision I've updated to has broken my
> > code. I don't have time to futz with this and it brings an element of
> > uncertainty to the development process. This may work fine for open
> > source projects like Mozilla but is not a good thing for large scale
> > commercial software development.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vadim Plessky [mailto:address@hidden
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 12:24 AM
> > To: address@hidden
> > Subject: Re: [Freetype] Font Fusion vs. Freetype?
> >
> >
> > On Tuesday 26 November 2002 2:45 am, Thibault Jamme wrote: [...]
> > |
> > |  FreeType and FontFusion don't appear to be in the same business.
> > | For
> > | one  thing FreeType is free, FontFusion is a commercial product.
> > |
> > |  FreeType is a collective effort that addresses a collective need.
> >
> > Paul, if you need (can afford for your projects) commercial product -
> > you would better check out D-Type.
> >>From what I have seen, D-Type's rendering is quite impressive. I don't
> > know how it compares to FreeType, though. FT-2.1.3 is indeed very
> > nice.
> >
> >
> >
> > |  I don't think anyone here should shy away with a comparison, but
> > | rather  welcome any test result. If FreeType is better, then let's
> > | boast. If not,  well then we have a useful reference to measure
> > | against (I saw some clean  screen shots at FontFusion) and possibly
> > | some goals set.
> >
> > If someone can provide me working renderer for either FontFusion, or
> > D-Type - I would be glad to make tests and post comparision results.
> >
> >
> >
> > |  I am very curious indeed to see a comparison. Whatever result is
> > | not
> > | going  to stop me from using FreeType as it is not viable for me to
> > | pay for a  licence - at least now. FreeType answers some needs
> > | extremely well. Since  FreeType does not rely on income (at least
> > | directly), competition is a  non-issue. And here you have a direct
> > | link with the developers.
> >
> > Which is extremly important, IMHO.
> > You can't get this for money.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Freetype mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://www.freetype.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype
> >
> >
> > This message is intended for the use of the individual/entity to whom
> > it is addressed. This message may contain privileged information
> > exempt from disclosure. If you are not the addressee, distribution or
> > copying of this message, or dissemination of the information contained
> > herein is strictly prohibited. If you should receive this message in
> > error, please destroy it, or return to sender, Thank You
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Freetype mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://www.freetype.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freetype mailing list
> address@hidden http://www.freetype.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype
>
>
> This message is intended for the use of the individual/entity to
> whom it is addressed. This message may contain privileged
> information exempt from disclosure. If you are not the addressee,
> distribution or copying of this message, or dissemination of the
> information contained herein is strictly prohibited. If you
> should receive this message in error, please destroy it, or
> return to sender, Thank You
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freetype mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://www.freetype.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype