PropertiesChanged signal, take 2

Christian Dywan christian at
Thu May 20 08:21:42 PDT 2010

Am Fri, 14 May 2010 10:51:41 +0300
schrieb Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz at>:

> Hi,
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Lennart Poettering
> <mzqohf at> wrote:
> > On Thu, 13.05.10 10:34, David Zeuthen (zeuthen at wrote:
> >
> >> Hi again,
> >>
> >> I talked to Lennart and we agreed the best way to solve this
> >> problem is by adding an extra parameter to convey the name of the
> >> property that changed (but not it's value). The attached patch
> >> does this and I'm planning to commit it shortly.
> >
> > Yepp! I like it! Thanks for putting this together...
> >
> You guys got be kidding, a list of properties names, duplicate
> property string names in the message where the initial argument was to
> reuse the message as much as possible to reduce overhead, the more
> this evolve the more I think PropertyChanged makes a lot more sense,
> it is far more simple.
> Please do not over-engineer.

I wonder why there is a need to duplicate the property names in the
first place. I read the arguments about avoiding costly to computed
values which made a lot of sense, but I didn't catch up on the
conclusion. I would expect an array for the value which can be empty so
that you easily see "aha, no value, gotta get that myself" (maybe type


More information about the dbus mailing list