[FIXED] delete base glyph

FontCreator - Font Editor FontCreator - Bug Reports
1
  1. create unmapped composite, e.g. a+overlinecomb
  2. AutoAttach, lsb(a), rsb(a)
    a_before.png
  3. delete the contents of the base glyph a and here’s the result:
    a_after.png
    Regardless of the mark, all marks shift to x=0, anchors shift and sth happens to the AW.

This doesn’t happen with LSB/RSB set to a specific value or to base().

2

Well, it might all seem confusing, but if your LSB is set to lsb(a) and you clear glyph “a”, the left side-bearing of a is changed from 37 to 0. So the composite will be forced to have a lsb of zero, thus the mark is moved to comply.

I am not sure why the RSB is not equal to 578 in your screenshots, but maybe you moved the rsb of the “a”.

3

Well, it might all seem confusing

Being confused is my default setting :laughing:

I am not sure why the RSB is not equal to 578 in your screenshots, but maybe you moved the rsb of the “a”.

Nope, didn’t:
aaa.png

4

So it is confusing to me, as 578 was the AW of the composite, while I was actually interested in the AW of the base glyph. Your new screenshots show that the values are correct.

5

How come?
Even if the overline moves to 0 and other values adjust, it’s width is 482. It seems that the new AW is the sum of a AW (537) and the width of the overline (482), to arrive at 1019. Why is that a correct value?

6

Any other value of AW would conflict with your expression for RSB.

7

Any other value of AW would conflict with your expression for RSB.

At the risk of sounding like a 3-year-old, why? I see the mechanism, but not the logic behind it.

8

Well, lsb plus the width of the outline plus rsb equals aw.

9

There ought to be a smiley hitting the wall especially for me! I hope other aspects of your job are triply fulfilling.

10

Another question: if a glyph (A) has numeric values as LSB/RSB, and I copy/paste special values from another glyph (B), it receives new numeric values. If a glyph (A) has lsb(X)/rsb(X) values, and I copy/paste special values from another glyph (B), it keeps lsb(X)/rsb(X). Am I too confused again to see the obvious?

11

No, this is just one more ordinary bug… :blush:

It will be fixed with the next upcoming update.

12

Oh, good, I’m not going crazy then :laughing: