dbus-glib - removing the generated bus method wrappers

[Matthew Johnson]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Thiago Macieira wrote:

> Right, I want them for developer use. So it should be full of annotations
> that are needed to properly generate code in the bindings.

what about stuff needed to generate them in the glib bindings? or in the
java bindings? Who generates these and for which bindings?

> I still don't like the idea of documenting stuff via annotations. This is
> XML, so please use a different tag or different XML namespace for it.
> It'll make the tools' lives a lot easier when separating the
> documentation from the actual introspection.

Can we make a decision on this? I really think there should be the
ability to include documentation in these, at least single-line
summaries. I think that a very good API resource is the introspection
data prettified (for example with my XSLT[1]).

1. http://mjj29.matthew.ath.cx/test-introspect.html, generated from
http://mjj29.matthew.ath.cx/test-introspect.xml using
http://mjj29.matthew.ath.cx/introspect.xsl and
http://mjj29.matthew.ath.cx/types.xml

At the moment I am using the org.freedesktop.DBus.Description
annotation, which I have no problem with (it's also the only way to keep
it around at runtime for the automatic XML generation in the Java
bindings)---if it's used to generate, say, javadoc comments or doxygen,
then it _is_ part of the generated code.

treating any annotations under org.freedesktop.DBus.Doc (say) as
documentation isn't that hard, but if you still don't like it, we should
definitely decide on a different tag (or document the use of a different
namespace officially) so that bindings and tools like my XSLT and the
dbus-viewers can use them.

Matt

-- 
Matthew Johnson
http://www.matthew.ath.cx/