Derived

I'm glad you fixed your keyboard, but that doesn't help. We didn't want to derive from sandbox, there was too much to overwrite and it's easier to derive from base and include one function than derive from sandbox and overwrite many. source

I like both Earwicker and Steve's answers, depending on what's required. If there's many of these objects being created and destroyed frequently, then you want the minimum amount of memory allocation possible, and thus Earwicker's is superior. However, if this is something that's usually "created and rarely re-made" then I'd go with Steve's answer, as maps are just generally a lot easier to work with, and grow dynamically as needed, but is probably too much overhead if this object is something being made and destroyed a lot. source

I know that GNOME uses the 2nd method, and casting pointers was a known thing as well. I don't remember there being any real hoops to jump through to do so. In fact, From a C memory model standpoint, there can't be any semantic difference between the two, since AFAIK the only possible difference would be compiler differences in structure padding, but since the code all runs through the same compiler, that would be a moot point. source

I have a work that may be considered a derived work from a GPL'd work and would find it difficult to release the complete source for technical reasons. Is it permissible for me to distribute the documentation for this work by itself without any source code or binaries? Context is that I'd like to provide a technical writing sample on job applications or relate the experience I gained from developing the project in the case that I cannot release the code. source

When I doing my food shopping, I make a point of avoiding things that I'm not sure of the origin, but when I'm out, not so much. Although, if I'm ever on the look out for a new hobby, a round-the-clock-vegan-purist will be the first thing on my list. source