On 03.09.2015 21:04, Erich E. Hoover wrote:
On 03.09.2015 19:36, Erich E. Hoover wrote:
...
Format 1 case looks fine, though I think it's better to reuse existing tables if possible for get_standard_glyph_name().
It looks like the existing tables are not in the right order, but I can use the GN_<name> values to make the table.
Right, this way we won't need to duplicate strings at least.
The index we are passed is the glyphNameIndex entry value, so there's no need to go through the table for those indices. For indices greater than 257 a "patch 2" would allow you to get the glyph name by finding the appropriate string in the table. I can happily prepare such a patch.
How so? As I'm reading docs you always have to use glyph index with Format 2 table and only if glyphNameIndex[glyph_index] is <= 257 you should use this glyphNameIndex[glyph_index] value as index value in Format 1. "patch 2" can wait of course.
Also Apple docs say that Format 2.5 and Format 4 exist, so probably we can just have a single fixme for all formats we don't support.