Hi Johan, On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 2:58 PM Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Luiz > > > On 12 Nov 2018, at 13.24, Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > It seems wrong to me to have to send your own object as method > > argument, usually this sort of communication goes as a Signal but it > > seems the Element interface has no signal to be able to do something > > like that. > > The problem with signals is that they cannot return an error, and I do think we’d want to have the daemon return an error if it cannot send the given message. Also, by default signals are broadcast, and it feels a bit hawkish to do unicast destinations for them. Well unicast signals is not a new thing, though we never used it that would be possible to do something like that, anyway D-Bus signals are subscription based which is the reason we haven't consider it to be problem to emit signal for Value changes in case of GATT attributes, that said the lack of error result could indeed be a problem but some of the errors are actually due to the checking object_path is valid? Other errors Im not sure, Ive assume if there is a response that would then call MessageReceived, but perhaps we want to validate the transmission itself, but I though that wasn't possible in BlueZ. -- Luiz Augusto von Dentz
