Re: SMuFL Bravura

[David Kastrup]

Aaron Hill <address@hidden> writes:

> On 2019-03-31 6:14 pm, edes wrote:
>> el 2019-04-01 a las 11:37 Andrew Bernard escribió:
>>
>>> Thanks so much. Now to learn Metafont then. Shouldn't be too hard
>>
>> unlike valentin, i admire you already even if you don't succeed. i
>> don't
>> know what admire the most: the determination of the "now to learn
>> metafont", or the optimism of the "shouldn't be too hard". i'm sure
>> all of
>> us are wishing you the best of luck.
>
> I gave Metafont a casual, first glance a number of months ago.  It did
> not seem that difficult, although I am sure it has its fair share of
> idiosyncrasies that I simply have not yet encountered.
>
> One of Metafont's strengths as a tool is that each glyph is described
> programmatically.

More like analytically.  One of the idiosyncrasies of Metafont is that
you usually describe the relations of the curves with equations rather
than assignments and Metafont then solves the equations.  It does not
make a difference between

    x = 7

and

    7 = x

It does have assignments ( := ) which work by first eliminating the
variable on the left-hand side as well as it can from existing
equations, then detaching it and then creating a new equation.

Also its expression machinery is designed around describing paths by
tracing semi-elliptical pencil outlines along cubic B-spline paths.

> I am not sure how complex the various articulations are that Andrew
> needs to add.  Assuming there is an existing glyph that is close but
> needs some tweaking, it should be fairly straightforward to adapt
> current code to the new glyph.

Imitation is the best form of flattery, yes.

-- 
David Kastrup