glib bindings (Was Re: [patch] gobject sender and pid)

[Havoc Pennington]

On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 19:14 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
>  1. Adding exceptions to introspection data; I raised this way back
> 
>      http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dbus/2005-March/002447.html
> 
>     and I still think it would be useful. These days I _still_ have
>     to grep my source code instead of just doing Introspect() or what
>     ever. I wonder how people writing apps speaking to HAL cope; oh
>     wait, we can check that; they don't handle all errors and I need
>     to point them to 5 different source files for them to figure out
>     what exceptions some method can throw... Pretty please?
> 

As I said before, if the rationale is docs, just put it in the docs. I
don't see how your argument above is not solved by docs? In fact, only
_one_ _language_ we currently bind even _supports_ marking exceptions on
methods in any way other than docs.[1]

If this is some kind of fundamental problem with a type system, every
language except Java has the same problem, and they seem to be
surviving.

Anyhow, I just haven't seen anyone address the points I've made on this
topic. I still think your arguments support javadoc @throws tag, rather
than the Java throws keyword.

[1] OK I realize that pedantically you can declare throw in C++ for
example, but in practice only Java

>  2. Should we install the introspection XML somewhere? As discussed
>     in the thread about a year back I don't think there was any
>     consensus.. Ideally the hal-devel or PolicyKit-devel RPM packages
>     or whatever would include this just like we include header files
>     and library stubs in such packages. I don't really think D-BUS
>     services are much different.

I don't remember the previous discussions here, surely we have discussed
it though?

Havoc