python bindings match rules

John (J5) Palmieri johnp at
Mon May 23 10:19:59 PDT 2005

There is already a bug for this and patch which I am working with
today :-)

On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 02:35 +1000, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> The current python bindings code is XXX'd with a re-think match rules comment. 
> I'd like to see the match rules change to allow you to specify less 
> information in the match rule, and still have the bindings trigger. For 
> instance, a signal of 
>    type='signal',interface='org.designfu.SampleService',sender=':1.35',path='/SomeObject',member='hello'
> would match something that had specified, say, 
>    type='signal',interface='org.designfu.SampleService',path='/SomeObject',member='hello' 
> The question is then which bits of the match rule should be compulsory? 
> Should we allow a match on (type,sender,path,member),  
> (type,interface,path,member) or even just (type,interface,member)? The 
> last, for instance, would allow you to say "I don't care _who_ generates this 
> signal, just let me know when it happens" - which would be needed if you 
> have multiple applications that could generate a particular signal for a 
> particular interface. (At least, that's how I understand this to work - 
> gentle corrections are more than encouraged <wink>)
> Comments welcome - if someone wants to give me some pointers as to how 
> this should work, I can work up a patch for it. 
> Anthony
> (j5: I assigned to you - 
> it's a cleanup of the existing code)
> -- 
> Anthony Baxter     <anthony at>
> It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
John (J5) Palmieri
Associate Software Engineer
Desktop Group
Red Hat, Inc.

More information about the dbus mailing list