Re: [Groff] Re: grohtml patches

[Gaius Mulley]

Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:

> > > I don't think it is a good idea to add the `image_generator'
> > > keyword to libgroff instead to the grohtml driver.  Which other
> > > driver needs `image_generator'?  It seems best to me to move that
> > > code to grohtml.
> > 
> > ok, I'm not sure this is as easy as clean as it sounds. Maybe it
> > would require quite a few support methods which effectively
> > duplicate libgroff ?
> 
> Please explain.

currently the image_generator is used only by pre-html.cpp:1650 (in my
copy) just after font::load_desc().  The font::load_desc in
src/libs/libgroff/font.cpp parses the DESC file and simply sets
various fields.  In our case it tests for the image_generator string
and sets the font::image_generator string. Ok, I concede :-) I guess
we could move this functionality into pre-html.cpp (in a similar way
to that already done for obtaining the postscript resolution in
src/preproc/html/pre-html.cpp:249). The duplication occurs (only in a
small part admittedly) in that we have another method which opens up
devhtml/DESC and obtains values from it. But I do agree that using my
approach introduces a library value in libgroff which only grohtml
uses. So, ok, I'll move the code and borrow heavily from the current
get_resolution method..

Gaius