Semantics of o.fd.DBus.Properties
thiago at kde.org
Thu Feb 7 23:24:51 PST 2008
Matthew Johnson wrote:
>I agree with Havoc that you should certainly say that once you have had
>a reply to the Set call then you can expect Get to return the new value.
>I don't think we should rely too much on the serialisation of messages,
>since it restricts how they can be implemented.
I have to object here.
A Get-after-Set does not have to return the new value. But the Set must
have completed and its effects taken place. There's a difference.
First, the value may be invalid. The setter function could have clamped or
normalised, etc. Second, there may have been an intervening Set from
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dbus/attachments/20080208/c28e5590/attachment.pgp
More information about the dbus