starred/terminal
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/terminal.git synced 2026-09-25 00:15:10 +00:00
Code Issues 19.0k Packages Projects Releases 20 Wiki Activity

➜ Heavy Round-Tipped Rightwards Arrow (U+279C) scalling in AtlasEngine #18579

New Issue
Open
opened 2026-01-31 06:18:21 +00:00 by claunia · 0 comments
claunia commented 2026-01-31 06:18:21 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @kasper93 on GitHub (Oct 2, 2022).

Windows Terminal version

54dc2c4

Windows build number

10.0.19044.0

Other Software

No response

Steps to reproduce

  1. Paste ➜

Expected Behavior

  1. Glyph is centered
  2. Glyph is not truncated

Actual Behavior

  1. Glyph is not centered
  2. Glyph is truncated

Before we start I want to say that I have this arrow in my zsh prompt that's why even small issues are noticeable looking at this all the time :)

There are two issues:

  • After scaling glyphs are not properly centered vertically. Enlarged for dramatic effect:

EDIT: ...and after writing all this, I noticed that this is expected behavior after 97dc5c8d75 Well I'm still complaining, my prompt (not on screenshots) looks ugly and I don't like this new behavior :( Mintty renders it centered.

image
Without scaling it is centered, although truncated. Basically this:

diff --git a/src/renderer/atlas/AtlasEngine.r.cpp b/src/renderer/atlas/AtlasEngine.r.cpp
index 73d6a7092..28008df05 100644
--- a/src/renderer/atlas/AtlasEngine.r.cpp
+++ b/src/renderer/atlas/AtlasEngine.r.cpp
@@ -636,6 +636,7 @@ AtlasEngine::CachedGlyphLayout AtlasEngine::_getCachedGlyphLayout(const wchar_t*
             scale.x = layoutBox.x / actualSizeX;
             scale.y = scale.x;
             scaleCenter.x = layoutBox.x * 0.5f;
+            scaleCenter.y = layoutBox.y * 0.5f;
         }
         if (overhang.top > _r.dipPerPixel || overhang.bottom > _r.dipPerPixel)
         {

With patch:
image

  • Second issue is more tricky. Basically what we do is to scale glyph to fit perfectly in the layout box. But it doesn't work nicely. If you look closely at the screenshots you will notice that both tail and the tip of the arrow is truncated by 1 or 2 pixels. I know it is very nitpicky and actually hard to show, sorry for that. It is more noticeable on normal smaller fonts where we have less pixels. Anyway I haven't read whole code, maybe there is clever way to round down scaling factor so it is always safe to apply, for my local build I just added safe margin around glyph, so that scaling never puts arrow outside allowed area.
    Without margin, tip is flat:
    image
    With margin, tip is nicely round:
    image

I personally think that having such margin/padding (depending how you look at it ;p) is better overall, even tho we are not using 100% of available space, in turn we are not actually overhanging ever due to scaling. But hey, there is probably better way to handle this (round/floor somewhere), I just quickly made the change for this report needs.

EDIT: Maybe we go out of the layout box because of anti-aliasing? Because I think it can alter surrounding (sub)pixels, but if we are exactly on the border and clip it would look worse?

Again sorry, for being nitpicky here, but I think we can make rendering nicer. Or if this is expected look and feel, at least I will know that I tried.

Thanks,
Kacper

/CC @lhecker

Originally created by @kasper93 on GitHub (Oct 2, 2022). ### Windows Terminal version 54dc2c4 ### Windows build number 10.0.19044.0 ### Other Software _No response_ ### Steps to reproduce 1. Paste `➜` ### Expected Behavior 1. Glyph is centered 2. Glyph is not truncated ### Actual Behavior 1. Glyph is not centered 2. Glyph is truncated Before we start I want to say that I have this arrow in my zsh prompt that's why even small issues are noticeable looking at this all the time :) There are two issues: * After scaling glyphs are not properly centered vertically. Enlarged for dramatic effect: EDIT: ...and after writing all this, I noticed that this is expected behavior after https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/commit/97dc5c8d754495d68996d341df961c9515b05804 Well I'm still complaining, my prompt (not on screenshots) looks ugly and I don't like this new behavior :( Mintty renders it centered. ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1126053/193429072-f371bf6f-b4c1-4601-bb3e-3c2b369ae3ae.png) Without scaling it is centered, although truncated. Basically this: ``` diff diff --git a/src/renderer/atlas/AtlasEngine.r.cpp b/src/renderer/atlas/AtlasEngine.r.cpp index 73d6a7092..28008df05 100644 --- a/src/renderer/atlas/AtlasEngine.r.cpp +++ b/src/renderer/atlas/AtlasEngine.r.cpp @@ -636,6 +636,7 @@ AtlasEngine::CachedGlyphLayout AtlasEngine::_getCachedGlyphLayout(const wchar_t* scale.x = layoutBox.x / actualSizeX; scale.y = scale.x; scaleCenter.x = layoutBox.x * 0.5f; + scaleCenter.y = layoutBox.y * 0.5f; } if (overhang.top > _r.dipPerPixel || overhang.bottom > _r.dipPerPixel) { ``` With patch: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1126053/193429335-13f6614d-8260-49d1-9961-fe48e0944a10.png) * Second issue is more tricky. Basically what we do is to scale glyph to fit perfectly in the layout box. But it doesn't work nicely. If you look closely at the screenshots you will notice that both tail and the tip of the arrow is truncated by 1 or 2 pixels. I know it is very nitpicky and actually hard to show, sorry for that. It is more noticeable on normal smaller fonts where we have less pixels. Anyway I haven't read whole code, maybe there is clever way to round down scaling factor so it is always safe to apply, for my local build I just added safe margin around glyph, so that scaling never puts arrow outside allowed area. Without margin, tip is flat: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1126053/193430099-0cf307b8-3f89-4742-9284-eb128998ddf2.png) With margin, tip is nicely round: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1126053/193430114-09736ba3-8e73-48a4-98f4-bfa41a6b29f7.png) I personally think that having such margin/padding (depending how you look at it ;p) is better overall, even tho we are not using 100% of available space, in turn we are not actually overhanging ever due to scaling. But hey, there is probably better way to handle this (round/floor somewhere), I just quickly made the change for this report needs. EDIT: Maybe we go out of the layout box because of anti-aliasing? Because I think it can alter surrounding (sub)pixels, but if we are exactly on the border and clip it would look worse? Again sorry, for being nitpicky here, but I think we can make rendering nicer. Or if this is expected look and feel, at least I will know that I tried. Thanks, Kacper /CC @lhecker
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
⛺ Reserved
A11yCO
A11yMAS
A11ySev1
A11ySev2
A11ySev3
A11yTTValidated
A11yUsable
A11yVoiceAccess
A11yWCAG
Area-Accessibility
Area-AtlasEngine
Area-AzureShell
Area-Build
Area-Build
Area-Chat
Area-CmdPal
Area-CodeHealth
Area-Commandline
Area-CookedRead
Area-DefApp
Area-Extensibility
Area-Fonts
Area-GroupPolicy
Area-i18n
Area-Input
Area-Interaction
Area-Interop
Area-Localization
Area-Output
Area-Performance
Area-Portable
Area-Quality
Area-Remoting
Area-Rendering
Area-Schema
Area-Server
Area-Settings
Area-SettingsUI
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-Suggestions
Area-Suggestions
Area-TerminalConnection
Area-TerminalControl
Area-Theming
Area-UserInterface
Area-VT
Area-Windowing
Area-WPFControl
AutoMerge
Blocking-Ingestion
Culprit-Centennial
Culprit-WinUI
Disability-All
Disability-Blind
Disability-LowVision
Disability-Mobility
External-Blocked-WinUI3
Fixed
Gathering-Data
good first issue
HCL-E+D
HCL-WindowsTerminal
Help Wanted
Impact-Compatibility
Impact-Compliance
Impact-Correctness
Impact-Visual
In-PR
InclusionBacklog
InclusionBacklog-Windows TerminalWin32
InclusionCommitted-202206
Issue-Bug
Issue-Docs
Issue-Feature
Issue-Feature
Issue-Question
Issue-Samples
Issue-Scenario
Issue-Task
Needs-Attention
Needs-Author-Feedback
Needs-Bisect
Needs-Discussion
Needs-Repro
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Triage
No-Recent-Activity
Priority-0
Priority-1
Priority-2
Priority-3
Product-Cmd.exe
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Conhost
Product-Conpty
Product-Meta
Product-Powershell
Product-Terminal
Product-WSL
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 Resolution-Answered
Resolution-By-Design
Resolution-Duplicate
Resolution-External
Resolution-Fix-Available
Resolution-Fix-Committed
Resolution-No-Repro
Resolution-Won't-Fix
Severity-Blocking
Severity-Crash
Severity-DataLoss
spam
this-will-be-a-breaking-change
Tracking-External
WindowsTerminal_Win32
Work-Item
zAskModeBug
zInbox-Bug
No Label Area-AtlasEngine Issue-Bug Needs-Author-Feedback Needs-Triage No-Recent-Activity Priority-2
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
claunia
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/terminal#18579
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?