kevin.krammer at gmx.at
Thu Mar 22 12:46:48 PDT 2007
On Thursday 22 March 2007 19:25 +0100, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Kevin Krammer wrote:
> >> Any library designed to be used by other languages.
> >Hmm, I thought that the main idea in D-Bus is to always use bindings.
> True, but many projects feel they must provide a C library that wraps the
> D-Bus calls. They don't bind to the application, though and don't use a
I know and I admit that it is a good use case for applications where this is
the only use of D-Bus.
However, as someone else mentioned in this thread, such a wrapper library can
then opt to cache the "ugly" dictionary in some context/handle and provide
easy primitive accessors.
I agree with Havoc that this issue has gotten more attention in this thread
than necessary, but I was quite irritated that the use case of a convenience
wrapper would have such strong influence on the actual D-Bus API.
Bitfields are a low level method of implementing sets of booleans and
therefore might not be a very good choice in a high level abstraction like a
As a bad example see Microsoft's usage of bitfields in their XML office
Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer
KDE user support, developer mentoring
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/attachments/20070322/bb4973b0/attachment.pgp
More information about the xdg