Problems with mono bindings
adam.lofts at gmail.com
Sat Mar 26 15:51:16 PST 2005
I've been using the mono dbus bindings, and have come up against a few
- The bindings are too slow. All types are boxed and unboxed during
transmission (although i don't think this is the only problem).
- No support for messages without replies / asynchronous communication
- Inability to use remote objects at method parameters on the client side. eg
object my_obj = Service.Get ( connection, "my.interface" );
my_obj.Method ( my_obj );
- No access to raw dbus api
- InterfaceAttribute is defined on an object type, not an interface type.
- ? Support for value types ?
Some of the problems above are inherent in the architecture of the
current bindings - e.g. the whole DBusType namespace implies boxing of
parameters. Because of this i have experimented with writing another
mono binding, which is at a state where the basic raw api is (mostly)
exposed and dynamic objects are created sufficient to call functions
with no return message (without any boxing of parameters).
If i carry keep working on my bindings (and they prove to be faster),
would they be accepted into dbus? Would they require an identical API?
Would i offend anyone in the process?
More information about the dbus