[Date Index][Thread Index]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: My previous patch...


On Wed, Nov 03, 1999 at 03:57:55PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
> Because when you create multiple images with gfont, you have to specify
> a unique file name for each string. With other include files (logo,
> imgbg, imgdot) the situation is different. I see no reason to have
> file1.logo-wml.gif file2.logo-wml.gif file3.logo-wml.gif ...
> because all these files are identical, so why not just "logo-wml.gif" ?
> So i think the current implementation of these include files is wrong.

        When looking at things I got the impression that
        there was a lot of redundant file creation, but I
        didn't look into it too deeply and just assumed that
        it was done for a good reason... and like all good
        assumptions this one seems to have been wrong...

	After a cursory check of the include files


	I don't see any reasons not to simply create one
	image rather than redundant images on a per file
	basis. From what I can see the filename is not
	needed for uniqueness.

	You are probably the best judge about whether this
	would actually work... If so it would certainly make
	things much cleaner... If you can't think of any
	reasons why it wouldn't work let me know and I'll
	try to come up with a new set of patches....

	(Without warning this might freak a few people out



Thomas Akin                       Kennesaw State University
Networking Instructor             Continuing Education
CNX, CSA, ICS                     1000 Chastain Road
takin@kennesaw.edu                Kennesaw, GA 30144-5591
Website META Language (WML)                www.engelschall.com/sw/wml/
Official Support Mailing List                   sw-wml@engelschall.com
Automated List Manager                       majordomo@engelschall.com