On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 05:36:31PM +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote: > " > The font fallback in dwm and dmenu is handled via libsl (i.e drw.c) and > it's a huge mess [0]. > > The way it works is also very inefficient (it calls XftFontMatch() for > every single "unknown" code-point). The `nomatches` cache is merely > there to stop the bleeding and is not really a proper fix. > " > > This part specificly. The tone if very whiny.
I see; the intention there was to just describe/explain why I think replicating drw is not a good idea. It wasn't meant to be whiny. > It doesn't help complaining the code is a mess or improper without > proposing a patch. The "proper" way (IMO) would be to build up a list of fonts which would be capable of representing as many code-points available in the system *right at startup* - instead of checking each unknown code-point as we go. This way if the code-point cannot be found within the list; we'll know right away that it's a missing glyph and there won't be any need to call XftFontMatch for each "unknown" code-point. The problem is, as I said, I'm not sure if it's even possible/feasible with Xft/FontConfig as I'm not very familiar with those libraries. If someone knows the answer, then feel free to speak up. If it is possible and someone can point out which routines I should be looking at then I can try to take a crack at it. In case that's not possible, then there's probably not a whole lot that can be done about the situation. - NRK
