[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing.
|
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
|
Subject: |
Re: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing. |
|
Date: |
Sat, 01 Jul 2000 11:32:45 +0200 (CEST) |
> Anyway, while doing a preliminary investigation, I noticed that the
> charstrings parsing is different in z1load/z1gload than it is in
> t1load/t1gload. Any particular reason? Is one going to be phased
> out in favor of the other?
According to David, z1 will be the future since its parser is faster
and smaller.
Werner
- type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing., Tom Kacvinsky, 2000/07/01
- FIXED: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing., Tom Kacvinsky, 2000/07/01
- Re: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing.,
Werner LEMBERG <=
- Re: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing., David Turner, 2000/07/01
- Re: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing., Tom Kacvinsky, 2000/07/01
- Re: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing., Werner LEMBERG, 2000/07/02
- Autohinting concerns [was: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing.], Tom Kacvinsky, 2000/07/02
- Re: Autohinting concerns [was: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing.], David Turner, 2000/07/02
- Re: Autohinting concerns [was: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing.], Werner LEMBERG, 2000/07/03
- Re: Autohinting concerns [was: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing.], Angus Duggan, 2000/07/03
- CJK hinting [was: Autohinting concerns], Tom Kacvinsky, 2000/07/04
- Re: Autohinting concerns [was: type1z vs. type1 charstringsprocessing.], David Turner, 2000/07/04