Re: Pango Binding Advice

Jeff Franks <jcf tpg com au> writes:

>   Havoc Pennington wrote:
> >Omit. Writing a backend in non-C would be pretty useless.
> >
> Omitting leads to one more question. I have classes that derive from a
> GObject encapsulation. Would it be reasonable to derived classes
> privately from PangoFontFamily and PangoFontFace ignoring the fact
> they inherit from GObject. PangoFontFamily and PangoFontFace are
> declared within the PANGO_ENABLE_BACKEND define.

I don't quite understand:

 - How could you ignore the fact that they inherit from GObject?
 - Why would you want to derive from these types unless you were
   implementing a new backend?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]