There have been lots of problems with trying to map glyphs to their unicode
values. It's more reliable to just use the private use areas so the browser's
font renderer doesn't mess with the glyphs.
Using the private use area for all glyphs did highlight other issues that this
patch also had to fix:
* small private use area - Previously, only the BMP private use area was used
which can't map many glyphs. Now, the (much bigger) PUP 16 area can also be
used.
* glyph zero not shown - Browsers will not use the glyph from a font if it is
glyph id = 0. This issue was less prevalent when we mapped to unicode values
since the fallback font would be used. However, when using the private use
area, the glyph would not be drawn at all. This is illustrated in one of the
current test cases (issue #8234) where there's an "ä" glyph at position
zero. The PDF looked like it rendered correctly, but it was actually not
using the glyph from the font. To properly show the first glyph it is always
duplicated and appended to the glyphs and the maps are adjusted.
* supplementary characters - The private use area PUP 16 is 4 bytes, so
String.fromCodePoint must be used where we previously used
String.fromCharCode. This is actually an issue that should have been fixed
regardless of this patch.
* charset - Freetype fails to load fonts when the charset size doesn't match
number of glyphs in the font. We now write out a fake charset with the
correct length. This also brought up the issue that glyphs with seac/endchar
should only ever write a standard charset, but we now write a custom one.
To get around this the seac analysis is permanently enabled so those glyphs
are instead always drawn as two glyphs.
Please see http://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-unused-vars; note that this patch purposely uses the same rule options as in `mozilla-central`, such that it fixes part of issue 7957.
It wasn't, in my opinion, entirely straightforward to enable this rule compared to the already existing rules. In many cases a `var descriptiveName = ...` format was used (more or less) to document the code, and I choose to place the old variable name in a trailing comment to not lose that information.
I welcome feedback on these changes, since it wasn't always entirely easy to know what changes made the most sense in every situation.
In the font in question, there are a couple of `topDict` entries that have invalid values (`0xF 0xF`, i.e. just eof markers without any actual numbers).
This causes the `parseFloatOperand` function, inside `CFFParser_parseDict`, to return `NaN`. Currently we pass this broken font onto the browser, which OTS unsurprisingly rejects.
Fixes https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1068432.
Re: issue 7261.
Given the we have `gulp fonttest`, which tests the `fonts.js` functionality at a higher level, and that we have *a lot* of font specific reference tests, I'm not convinced that we *also* need unit-tests for it.
