Introspect documentation for methods, signals, properties

Tako Schotanus quintesse at
Sat Feb 18 09:23:08 PST 2006

Matthew Johnson wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, Tako Schotanus wrote:
>> But that would mean that you would need to have those documents 
>> installed on your system. I think that is not very useful if what you 
>> want is just some descriptive comments when you use the "DBus Object 
>> Browser" (ok, that does not exist yet, but I've seen kdbus so things 
>> like that will become commonplace =). And I don't know if DBus will 
>> ever be used for communication between systems but then it might 
>> happen much more often that you won't have those docs installed.
> I've already had someone contribute a dbus 'browser' to the Java
> bindings and I have written an XSL that converts the introspection data
> into a javadoc-like interface description. Both of these could really
> use short descriptions.
Heh, funny, I just realised that the guy I responded to is actually the 
author of kdbus ;-)

But yes, I agree, inline-descriptions are the way to go IMO. I do wonder 
if you can force them to be short though. Like I comemnted in another 
message, if the bindings get generated from some C++/Java/whatever API 
it would be logical to use their Doxygen/Javadocs/etc for the 
description in DBus (what else could you use?). But those docs can be 
quite large at times. On the other hand for a browser app it doesn't 
matter so much if you ask for full introspection data and get several 
100KBs of XML because you won't be doing it many times anyway.


More information about the dbus mailing list