When we allocate a graphene_point_t on the stack, there's no guarantee
that it will be aligned at an 8-byte boundary, which is an assumption
made by gsk_pathop_encode() (which wants to use the lowest 3 bits to
encode the operation). In the places where it matters, force the
points on the stack and embedded in structs to be nicely aligned.
By using a distinct type for this (a union with a suitable size and
alignment), we ensure that the compiler will warn or error whenever we
can't prove that a particular point is, in fact, suitably aligned.
We can go from a `GskAlignedPoint *` to a `graphene_point_t *`
(which is always valid, because the `GskAlignedPoint` is aligned)
via &aligned_points[0].pt, but we cannot go back the other way
(which is not always valid, because the `graphene_point_t` is not
necessarily aligned nicely) without a cast.
In practice, it seems that a graphene_point_t on x86_64 *is* usually
placed at an 8-byte boundary, but this is not the case on 32-bit
architectures or on s390x.
In many cases we can avoid needing an explicit reference to the more
complicated type by making use of a transparent union. There's already
at least one transparent union in GSK's public API, so it's presumably
portable enough to match GTK's requirements.
Increasing the alignment of GskAlignedPoint also requires adjusting how
a GskStandardContour is allocated and initialized. This data structure
allocates extra memory to hold an array of GskAlignedPoint outside the
bounds of the struct itself, and that array now needs to be aligned
suitably. Previously the array started with at next byte after the
flexible array of gskpathop, but the alignment of a gskpathop is only
4 bytes on 32-bit architectures, so depending on the number of gskpathop
in the trailing flexible array, that pointer might be an unsuitable
location to allocate a GskAlignedPoint.
Resolves: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/6395
Signed-off-by: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>
We don't need to have the derivative as a curve,
it is enough for us to compute values of the
derivative at a given t, which we can also do
for conics.
Arcs were appealing, but they have a fatal flaw: we can't
split our arcs without changing the ellipse they trace.
That could be fixed by adding an extra parameter, but then
it is no longer any better than conics.
So switch back to conics, which have the advantage that they
are used elsewhere.
Add a new curve type for elliptical arcs
and use it for rounded rectangles and circles.
We use the 'E' command to represent elliptical
arcs in serialized paths.
