Bug 19728 – [Qt] Support text-shadow blur

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: Text

[Jonathon Jongsma (jonner)]

There is an initial patch to support text shadows in the Qt port (Bug #18459), but that doesn't yet support blur.  There is a commented-out function GraphicsContext::drawTextShadow() in the source that seems to have a blur implementation.  We should try to port this to the new text-shadow implementation.

[Jonathon Jongsma (jonner)]

hm, I tried to port the old implementation and performance seemed incredibly bad.  I may have done something wrong, but my first impression is that it will be difficult to add blur support with decent performance.  I may come back to this later, but I'm moving on to other things for the moment.  If anybody else is interested in adding blur, feel free to grab this bug.

[Simon Hausmann]

I can imagine that the performance is related to the FIXME's in the old code, which allocates a QImage with the size of the entire viewport.

[Ariya Hidayat]

Add and assign to myself.

[Ariya Hidayat]

See also https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34479

[Ariya Hidayat]

Created attachment 65169 [details]
Screenshot of the result of applying the patch

I have a patch ready, the attached screenshot shows the result of the blur shadow.

[Ariya Hidayat]

Created attachment 65170 [details]
Patch

[Kenneth Rohde Christiansen]

Comment on attachment 65170 [details]
Patch

Isn't there some way to factor some of this into online methods?

[Ariya Hidayat]

> Isn't there some way to factor some of this into online methods?

It is not trivial since one works with QPainter::drawText while the other uses QTextLayout/QTextLine. It is unfortunate that the boilerplate for the prolog and epilog are similar, but I can't see a clean way to refactor them, without falling back to C-ism macro magic.

[Ariya Hidayat]

Committed r65876: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/65876>

[Ademar Reis]

There must be a very good reason to include any more bugs as blockers for the qtwebkit-2.1 release at this point. Since I don't see one, I'm removing it from the blocking list. :-)

Feel free to add it as a *candidate* for inclusion (bug #44677) and please state the motivation/reason/requirement for it.