[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freedesktop-dbus
Subject:    Re: about the D-Bus C API.
From:       "Avery Pennarun" <apenwarr () gmail ! com>
Date:       2007-11-13 19:16:14
Message-ID: 32541b130711131116r159afad8scbb9acfc41e9797c () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 13/11/2007, Simon McVittie <simon.mcvittie@collabora.co.uk> wrote:
> Be aware that not all bindings support unicast signals properly (or at
> all). I suspect they're more likely to work in bindings that have a
> generic "listen for signals matching this rule" function rather than
> having to do *everything* through proxy objects.

My brain must just be wired differently than everyone else's.  I don't
like any of the object-binding layers precisely because they seem to
overcomplicate things like this.

I just think of DBus signals like UDP with some extra features.  UDP
without unicast seems strange to me; UDP broadcasts and multicasts are
the rare ones.  But that's what most people seem to use DBus signals
for.

Hmm, maybe that makes sense after all.  If I wanted unicast, of
course, I could just use a socket and send some datagrams, so there'd
be no reason for DBus at all.  It's UDP multicast that's a pain to set
up, and that's the hole DBus fills.

Have fun,

Avery
_______________________________________________
dbus mailing list
dbus@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]