Object paths naming conventions?

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Havoc,

> > I might be totally missing something here, but please show me where it
> > the pure object path and not object path + interface that actually
> > defines the language object.
> >
> 
> I think what you're missing is that not all objects are singletons.
> There can be multiple objects implementing an interface.
> 
> The "just use interface" shortcut, in say Java, would look something like:
> 
> class SingletonFactory {
>   void registerSingleton(Class klass, Object o);
>   Object getSingleton(Class klass);
> }
> 
> Where when a message arrived, you'd do getSingleton() based on the
> interface (class) to get the registered singleton instance.
> 
> In this case you don't care what the object path is, it's true. So it
> would be fine to allow omitting the object path to mean "look up
> singleton by interface"

that is not what I am talking about. An interface can have multiple
instances aka multiple objects can implement that said interface. That
is not what this is about. It is pretty clear that we do need this,
because otherwise the whole D-Bus model would make no sense.

My point is that the actual meaning (name) of the object path is
irrelevant and it is not needed to tie this to the interface/API
contract. And thus the namespacing of object paths becomes irrelevant.

Regards

Marcel