----- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----

To: "Tomas Frydrych" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)
References: <3CC6DB11.5706.2C86B8@localhost>
From: Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 24 Apr 2002 22:03:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: <3CC6DB11.5706.2C86B8@localhost>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lines: 26
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


"Tomas Frydrych" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: 
> So, the bottom line is that Pango only really works on Unix. Until 
> this changes, it is not suitable for use in AW.
> 

So you're going to reimplement over a year of debugged work by an i18n
expert and a bunch of contributors with language-specific expertise,
instead of working on fixing up the win32 port, which needs to be done
for GTK itself anyway?

And end up with a document editing area with different behavior 
from your entry boxes in terms of selection, delete keys, etc.

This just doesn't make sense to me. I don't think you understand how
complex it will be to implement all this, or how hard it will be to
match the user-visible behavior that Pango presents (it will be easy
for Europe of course, but not for the hard languages).

If the Pango release cycle doesn't sync with yours then cut-and-paste
Pango for a while and keep an internal copy (ideally as pristine
tarball + namespace sed job + patch set). But there's no reason to
redo the work.

Havoc


----- End forwarded message -----

Reply via email to