Re: Pango Binding Advice

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

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?

Regards,
                                        Owen