Hi,
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 1:19 PM, David Zeuthen wrote:
> So I think maybe we want
>
> GBusLowlevelConnection
>
> that is useful for all languages and then
>
> GBusConnection
>
> for the C/GObject binding. But that's ugly. Ideas?
Maybe there's a ProxyManager or something which is higher level
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
> I'm not saying dbus-glib is inherently harder than the raw bindings -
> perhaps the documentation just fails to make the point why it would be
> easier ;-).
>
I do think it's only sometimes easier. For me the iterator API on dbus
messa
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 1:19 PM, David Zeuthen wrote:
>
> So, to sum up, the main suggestions you are making are
>
> - Rework low-level bits of EggDBus so it's like dbus-hippo-helper
>
> - Don't try to hide libdbus in the low-level bits
> (but do hide it from the high-level bits)
>
> - ma
Does this crash in g_type_class_ref look like it's due to concurrent
GObject construction?
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=573768
This crash happens during login of gnome-keyring-daemon. Objects are
being created by different components' threads [1]
Cheers,
Stef
[1] Gnome Keyring Arc
Sven Neumann wrote:
> I definitely think so. GtkEntry is getting more and more complex
> recently and it seems like a bad idea to use such complex code for
> sensitive stuff like a password entry. IMO it would make sense to create
> a dedicated widget for this. Perhaps it is possible to share a com
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 8:19 PM, David Zeuthen wrote:
>
>> So I don't really know about bindings. I kind of assumed most other
>> languages had their own bindings in place based on libdbus since that's
>> pretty much what libdbus is all abou
Hey,
thanks for taking a look.
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 21:03 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Finally, maybe it's useful to go more concrete looking at eggdbus and
> mentioning some of the specific stuff in there. I know it's a lot of
> comments but I'm just giving my opinion, take it for
Needing a fast priority queue for an internal project recently and
noticing that glib doesn't have one, I wrote it myself. I'd be
interested in submitting the code, and I'd be willing to do the
necessary cleanup and documentation work on it.
It's a pretty straight-forward implementation of a Fibon
2009/3/3 Havoc Pennington
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 6:03 AM, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen
> wrote:
> > 2009/3/2 Havoc Pennington
> >>
> >> Anyway, I think there is no difference between method calls and
> >> message passing. The only difference is in whether the client side API
> >> is made
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 6:03 AM, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen
wrote:
> 2009/3/2 Havoc Pennington
>>
>> Anyway, I think there is no difference between method calls and
>> message passing. The only difference is in whether the client side API
>> is made to look just like a native object. But that'
Hi Brian,
>> I understand that there is no difference on-the-wire between a
>> function-call and message passing. The difference is in peoples
>> perceptions and expectations.
>>
>> When I read CORBA IDL and see:
>>
>> int AFunction (int, int);
>>
>> Because of the connotations provided to me by y
2009/3/2 Havoc Pennington
> Anyway, I think there is no difference between method calls and
> message passing. The only difference is in whether the client side API
> is made to look just like a native object. But that's totally
> orthogonal to the IDL and to the wire protocol.
>
To quote yourse
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:55:33 +0100 Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 22:26 +, Rob Taylor wrote:
> > Brian J. Tarricone wrote:
> > > Whether or not the object is local (in-process) or not is
> > > irrelevant. Whether or not the method call is sync or async is
> > > also irrelevan
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 22:26 +, Rob Taylor wrote:
> Brian J. Tarricone wrote:
> > Whether or not the object is local (in-process) or not is irrelevant.
> > Whether or not the method call is sync or async is also irrelevant. It's
> > a method call, pure and simple. DBus itself even calls them me
On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 14:50 -0500, Michael B. Trausch wrote:
>
> There seem to be those that are of the mindset "If you can use Xlib for
> a problem, why not just use GDK?" which is what led me to believe that
> it might be suitable for my purposes. But if GDK only lets you "see"
> things that t
15 matches
Mail list logo
