Re: [pygame] BUG: Inconsistent font behavior between Windows and Linux

["Charlie Nolan" <funnyman3595@xxxxxxxxx>]

Okay, we don't quite seem to be understanding each other here, so let
me be explicit.

1. This is not a large issue, and I understand that.  It's a 1-pixel
error, and if there are other priorities at the moment, fine, say
that.  At the same time, that 1-pixel error triggered word-wrapping
and caused a perplexing bug on my end.  Isn't this exactly the kind of
cross-platform issue that python and pygame are supposed to prevent?

2. I am not a C/++ coder, nor do I know SDL.  Last I checked, that was
kinda the point of pygame: you don't have to.  From where I sit, this
looks like a bug.  It's possible that it's a version mismatch or some
obscure option, but I've got no way to determine that unless you tell
me how.

3. As mentioned, I suspect this is an underlying SDL issue.  As a
result of point 2, I can't exactly go to them with this myself,
because I neither know nor care about how pygame handles fonts.  I
just want it to work correctly.  Therefore, if this is an SDL issue, I
need someone to take it to them for me.

4. We could rapidly narrow down the list of possibilities if a couple
people would take 5 minutes (if that) to run the test I gave and see
who's affected by it.  I have confirmation from my end that it's
appeared on at least three separate Windows systems, so other *NIX
results would be particularly useful, and not, I would think, terribly
hard to come by here.

5. In the abscence of suggestions or external test results, I am left
to assume that I'm being ignored and/or swept under the carpet.  I've
done my best to give you every piece of information I could, so I
don't feel it's unreasonable to expect minimal effort on your part in
return.  Throw me a bone, here!

-FM

On 9/2/08, René Dudfield <renesd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> hi,
>
> It's likely the different compilation options for freetype. Or even
> gentoo specific patches to freetype or sdl_ttf.
>
> Otherwise it could be different bitdepth surfaces.  eg, 24bit on one
> machine and 16bit on another.
>
> cheers,
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Charlie Nolan <funnyman3595@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> *taps on the glass*  Anybody out there?
>>
>> On 8/25/08, Charlie Nolan <funnyman3595@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> So, anything else you want me to poke at, or is someone going to take
>>> a look?  For that matter, have you guys been able to duplicate the
>>> problem?
>>>
>>> -FM
>>>
>>> On 8/23/08, Charlie Nolan <funnyman3595@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> It was at 2.3.7.  I downgraded it to 2.3.5 temporarily, and it shows
>>>> the same results as 2.3.7.
>>>>
>>>> -FM
>>>>
>>>> On 8/22/08, Lenard Lindstrom <len-l@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> That's right for SDL_ttf. What freetype version does Gentoo have.
>>>>> Pygame
>>>>> 1.8 uses freetype-2.3.5 on Windows.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lenard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Charlie Nolan wrote:
>>>>>> SDL_ttf is at 2.0.9 on Linux, and after digging a bit, the SDL_ttf.dll
>>>>>> that came with pygame shows version 2.0.9.0.  Looks like a match to
>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/22/08, Brian Fisher <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It may be a difference between different versions of SDL_ttf or of
>>>>>>> freetype,
>>>>>>> which may not be a bug if the new er behavior is part of a bug fix.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So what version of SDL_ttf do you have on Windows and on Linux?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Charlie Nolan
>>>>>>> <funnyman3595@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suspect this will just get passed upstream to SDL, but someone
>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>> need to translate for them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "7" glyph in the attached font at size 21 behaves inconsistently
>>>>>>>> on Windows (XP SP2) and Linux (Gentoo).  Running the test script on
>>>>>>>> the two systems, I get these results:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Linux:
>>>>>>>> (11, 16)
>>>>>>>> (12, 16)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <Surface(22x16x32 SW)>
>>>>>>>> <Surface(22x16x32 SW)>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [(0, 9, 0, 8, 11), (0, 9, 0, 8, 11)]
>>>>>>>> [(0, 9, 0, 8, 11), (-1, 9, 0, 8, 11)]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Windows:
>>>>>>>> (11, 16)
>>>>>>>> (12, 16)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <Surface(22x16x32 SW)>
>>>>>>>> <Surface(23x16x32 SW)>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [(0, 10, 0, 8, 11), (0, 10, 0, 8, 11)]
>>>>>>>> [(0, 10, 0, 8, 11), (0, 11, 0, 8, 12)]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My interpretation of this is that the 7 is behaving a bit screwy at
>>>>>>>> that size.  It renders as 12x16, but has an X offset of -1, for an
>>>>>>>> effective size of 11x16.  On Windows, the X offset appears to be
>>>>>>>> lost,
>>>>>>>> thus causing the glyph to incorrectly have an extra pixel of padding
>>>>>>>> on the left.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm also puzzled as to why maxx is one larger on Windows, but that
>>>>>>>> part doesn't seem to cause a problem.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>