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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: DCOP interfaces (Re: little problems with kicker and docking)
From:       Carsten Pfeiffer <carpdjih () cetus ! zrz ! TU-Berlin ! DE>
Date:       2000-06-24 16:25:59
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sat, Jun 24, 2000 at 04:43:14PM +0100, David Faure wrote:

Hi,

> > I know, but are interfaces generated out of headerfiles?
> Yes, that's what dcopidl does.

hmpf, this should have been "but are _all_ interfaces..." hence the next
question :)
 
> > No hand-written process() methods?

> You mean, like kicker's ? It's quite inconsistent, having most headers in
> include/ (even those that define DCOP interfaces) and some in interfaces/.
> Or should headers like knotify.h be put in both ?
> (It has to be in include/ as well, since classes inherits from it).

Ah, I see... maybe symlink? The problem is, that you can't use the
DCOP-header files as the "normal" ones from kdelibs. Having them mixed
would be confusing IMHO.
 
> For dynamic exploration, don't we have all the necessary iterators in
> dcop ? Getting the list of registered apps, and for each the registered
> objects, and for each the functions ?

This would be great, but not sufficient. When developing an app that needs
to talk to other services, I would rather like to look at some
headerfiles/API docs than ask the dcopserver what is currently available
and running on my system.

Cheers,
Carsten Pfeiffer
-- 
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/1632/

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