Semantics of o.fd.DBus.Properties

Havoc Pennington hp at
Fri Feb 8 04:03:08 PST 2008


On Feb 8, 2008 2:24 AM, Thiago Macieira <thiago at> wrote:
> 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.

My previous email said "If I do a Set then a Get, I would expect the
Set to have taken effect.
(Maybe it was clamped or threw an error, but I would expect whatever
the Set is going to do, it has already done.)"


More information about the dbus mailing list