Re: [dev] [st] font fallback

From: Christoph Lohmann <>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 15:57:21 +0100


On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 15:57:21 +0100 Charlie Kester <> wrote:
> On 12/29/2012 12:20 AM, Kai Hendry wrote:
> > Initially I was worried that the newer version was somehow slower to
> > the version I was running before.
> Not slower, but definitely bigger. The stripped executable is now 16x
> the size of that from the 0.3 release -- thanks, no doubt, to these font
> caches, which are implemented as static arrays.

That’s only partially true. The array is adding 48k, which another patch
series will reduce. Most of the additional memory usage is due to the
font handling. So the inability of font handling in is
the reason why too much has to be done over and over again. Yet another
abstraction layer would hide it but waste the same resources.


Christoph Lohmann
Received on Sat Jan 05 2013 - 15:57:21 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Jan 05 2013 - 16:12:04 CET