[interfacekit] Re: _BWidthBuffer_

"burton666@xxxxxxxxx" <burton666@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > I don't have DANO and so I didn't test the class under it, but I 
> > > think I'll remove those #if as soon as we agree on the version 
> > > of the _width_table_ struct to use.
> > What do you think is the better one?
> I think the Dano one is better, because it stores a BFont in the 
> table, 
> instead of just its "FamilyAndStyle" and the "Size". Maybe it wastes 
> a 
> bit more space, but that way you can differentiate fonts also by 
> spacing 
> (a thing that it's not done in R5), or flags, or whatever else you 
> want.

Then let's use that one. It's a private class, so I think we're free to 
change it - and it would be easy to change the Tracker headers.
But, btw, Tracker/R5 does run under both, R5 and Dano, right? Is that 
by any chance even binary compatible?

Bye,
   Axel.

Other related posts: