[GRASS-dev] d.text vs d.text.freetype vs d.text.new
glynn at gclements.plus.com
Sun Feb 11 18:27:04 EST 2007
> > > while starting to write up the changes in GRASS 6.3 for
> > > an upcoming 6.3.0 release, I found that we have
> > > d.text
> > > d.text.freetype
> > > d.text.new
> > >
> > > What is the state of d.text.new?
> Glynn wrote:
> > AFAICT, it's essentially a superset of the other two.
> > Although it lacks the charset=, path= and -c switches from
> > d.text.freetype, that functionality is available through other means
> > (-c is implied if text= isn't used, the encoding and path can be set
> > in the freetypecap file or via d.font[.freetype]).
> WRT publishing the name, note that d.text.new must be a temporary name,
> and it only exists in the development version (the name will become an
> anachronism at some point in the future).
> We need to figure out what to do with it, currently IIUC it is mainly
> there to help with changing fonts in the GUI-- My guess is that the new
> WxPython GUI will place text directly on the canvas and not rely on a
> d.* module at all.
> So the question is, what is the future of the d.text.* modules as they
> will exist to support the command line xmon version of GRASS? And in the
> short term, what to rename d.text.new, or will it replace d.text?
It should replace d.text.
Also, d.text.freetype and d.font.freetype are now essentially
redundant, as d.text.new and d.font can use FreeType fonts.
They may as well be retained in the short term; the existing d.text
should probably be kept as e.g. d.text.old for a transitional period.
Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>
More information about the grass-dev