> Unfortunately, mf overlaps can hardly be avoided in many cases,
> because lots of glyphs are being composed out of several overlapping
> predefined components.
Yes, and avoiding overlaps everywhere would lead to unnecessarily
complicated code. Tools like FontForge should be used to fix this in
a post-processing stage, exactly as we do.
> But, being harried by all the error messages currently produced (and
> intrigued by your report), I've had a look at the specific errors
> and found a way to solve all the issues without actually changing
> the final result (well, except for an unnoticeable change to the TAB
> clef invisible to the human eye).
Great. However, as mentioned above, I would not be happy with a
serious decrease of readability of the already quite complicated
METAFONT code...
> [...]
>
> All in all *minimal changes* that *do not affect the resulting mf
> outline* at all but help FontForge to better handle the font
> conversion without any complaints..
>
> What do you think? Should I prepare a patch?
Your ideas look nice, thanks for working on that! Please note that
for testing and inspecting outlines you should process the METAFONT
sources with
FONTFORGE=foo mf2pt1 ...
to really see the outline overlaps (if viewed with FontForge, say).
The output of `gftodvi` doesn't help here.
Werner
