This introduces a potential performance regression, because
FindCmap works on the existing font tables and just sets up
a lookup function, while ParseCMAP creates some optimized,
in-memory lookup table, which needs a bit more work, but
is faster in its usage, I think. At least the initial usage
is faster the old way, as the CMAPs aren't decoded at all.
As you can see, the old code is just used on Windows and
MacOS / iOS. Deep in the bowels of the PrintFontManager, the
CMAP is also decoded using ParseCMAP...
So I'm not sure this potential regression really exists. Most
fonts will already have a decoded CMAP, so my guess is this
is actually faster in the end. No idea, how to measure.
Change-Id: I52caac1264cd3ff11a2a3fa6e9c800f67f146a79
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/102685
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Jan-Marek Glogowski <glogow@fbihome.de>
c7482bc290