It might be useful as a tool to have binaries with direct access to the shaper's internals to prototype views and ideas. Creating a command line app that just takes the font and the text and gives output is trivial, but there are a lot of different options and knobs to tweak the output.
The question is, if rustybuzz were to add equivalents (say rb-shape and rb-view, is it important to follow the same options/interface as much as we can or should it do its own thing?
You can see the different options with $ hb-view --help-all
Hello,
It might be useful as a tool to have binaries with direct access to the shaper's internals to prototype views and ideas. Creating a command line app that just takes the font and the text and gives output is trivial, but there are a lot of different options and knobs to tweak the output.
The question is, if rustybuzz were to add equivalents (say
rb-shape
andrb-view
, is it important to follow the same options/interface as much as we can or should it do its own thing?You can see the different options with
$ hb-view --help-all