david at fubar.dk
Fri May 8 17:28:06 PDT 2009
On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 20:23 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
> Sure, both things are feasible, just not sure it's worth it. More
> importantly, what's the _point_ in such an exercise?
> > > Also, do not underestimate that it's really nice to just be able to do
> > >
> > > $ less /usr/share/dbus-1/idl/org.freedesktop.DeviceKit.Disks.didl
> > $ dbus-xml-to-idl
> > /usr/share/dbus-1/idl/org.freedesktop.DeviceKit.Disks.xml | less
> > is not really that bad.
> Any exactly why wouldn't I just look at the IDL instead? And if this
> would ever work, then the XML files in /usr/share/dbus-1/interfaces
> would look different from what's on the wire because they would need to
> contain more information than what you transmit on the wire.
OK, after reading your other mail, the point here is that some .xml file
may have been produced from another source (e.g. GObject Introspection
scanning or whatever) than the IDL compiler, right?
I can buy that. But the extensions we need to D-Bus introspection XML
(the variant installed in /usr/share/dbus-1/typelib or whatever) are
going to be extremely ugly...
More information about the dbus