Re: Ligatures (was: Unify the Platforms: Cairo+FreeType+Harfbuzz Everywhere (except TTY))

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Pip Cet <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 10:01:03 +0000
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
> 
> > If we only want this feature for ASCII ligatures, then it sounds like
> > a limitation to me (and frankly, somewhat unclean as features go),
> 
> Not "only for ASCII ligatures", but not "any conceivable combination
> of codepoints into glyphs" either. Just those supported by the font
> and Harfbuzz.
> 
> > but
> > if we really want this only for these limited cases, we will need to
> > somehow indicate to the display engine which ligatures are to be
> > handled like this and which aren't.
> 
> Well, we now know that fonts can provide information about how a
> ligature is to be split into one-dimensional slices;

The question is: do we want to show those carets for all the character
compositions, even if the information is provided?  If not, we will
have to indicate somehow whether they should or shouldn't be shown for
each particular grapheme cluster.

> Of course that means that Emacs behavior would depend on the font
> tables in ways it currently doesn't. That's a problem.

It isn't a problem to depend on that if most fonts provide this
information.  Then we could simply say this is not supported when the
information is not in the font.  But if many fonts that support
ligatures don't provide this information, we will need to have some
fallback, like assume that every codepoint has the same share of the
ligature's width.  the fact that other applications use a simplistic
heuristic and not the information in the fonts suggests that either
the information is not readily available or there are some other
problems with using it.

> > Right, the actual implementation will have to be different.  In
> > particular, I think that if ligatures will use automatic compositions,
> > the information you need is already stored in the composition table
> > and reachable from the glyph string, so you don't need to invoke the
> > shaper again.
> 
> Well, I'm sorry to bring up a different (though somewhat related
> issue), but kerning is also an issue: we need a shaper to get that
> right, not just a composition table, right?

Automatic compositions already use the shaper, see autocmp_chars.

> > I see you implemented this for static compositions, which are
> > semi-obsolete.
> 
> I'm sorry, I'm afraid I don't understand. This should handle any
> composition the shaper does, and only those, but slices up everything
> horizontally by default.

I'm talking about the changes in gui_produce_glyphs.  Its high-level
structure is basically

  if (it->what == IT_CHARACTER)
    {
    ... /* handles character glyphs */
    }
  else if (it->what == IT_COMPOSITION && it->cmp_it.ch < 0)
    {
    ... /* A static compositions. */
    }
  else if (it->what == IT_COMPOSITION)
    {
      /* A dynamic (automatic) composition.  */
    }
  [...]

You made changes only in the "static compositions" part.  That code
handles compositions created by compose-region.  The "modern" way of
composing text in Emacs uses automatic compositions, which are
controlled by data in composition-function-table.  This is where we
call the shaping engine to produce the glyphs according to rules
stored in the font.  I don't see in your patch any changes that affect
ligatures created by automatic compositions; did I miss something?

If you use the automatic compositions route, then the information you
need, i.e. the number of clusters in the shaped text and the overall
width of the ligature, is already produced by the shaper and stored in
the "gstring" object in the composition table, see the description of
that object in the doc string of composition-get-gstring.  So there
should be no need to invoke the shaper inside gui_produce_glyphs and
elsewhere.  (If we want to use the carets information from the font,
we will probably need to extend the gstring object to store that as
well, and extend the shape method to extract this information when
available.)

> > Also, I don't see the code which moves point inside
> > the ligature; Emacs will not allow doing that by default.  In
> > particular, how did you tell the display code to show the cursor on
> > the middle 'f', not on the first one?  Did I miss something?
> 
> I produce three "struct glyph"s for "ffi": each has width one third of
> the actual font glyph, and stores, in convoluted form, information
> about which slice of the font glyph is to be actually drawn.

Ah, okay, I missed that.  But producing 3 glyphs instead of just one
is not necessarily the best idea, I think.  As you point out, one
problem will be with splitting the ligature across lines.  Another
problem is more expensive display.  And we won't be able to display
the ligature as a single glyph, for those who want that, at least not
easily.

> > And finally, you said you intended to do this via row->clip, but this
> > patch does something very different.  What changed your mind?
> 
> I was surprised this no longer seemed to be strictly necessary: as far
> as the display code is concerned, we're dealing with three separate
> glyphs with overhang areas, and those are already handled by the
> cursor-drawing code.

Yes.  But if we return to a single glyph, then we'd need to do some
clipping.

> On the other hand, it deals with kerning as well as ligatures.

You mean, kerning of simple characters, for which we don't produce
ligatures?  Or kerning within ligatures?  If the latter, then I don't
see why we'd need that: font designers already design the ligatures to
have the optimal kerning, no?