Hi Lennart, all, On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 6:40 PM Lennart Poettering <lennart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fr, 04.01.19 09:39, Giacinto Cifelli (gciofono@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I would like to give my DBus parameters names other than the default > > arg_X for the introspection. > > > > Is it ok if I post some commits to do that, or is the feature excluded > > by choice? > > It was excluded because the data is kinda redundant and I couldn't > come up with a sexy, convincing way how to denote this in the sources. > I have submitted my change, it has been reviewed (for the form), but not taken for merge. I don't want to be pushy, just I don't know if I need to do something more. And I was expecting some comments about the sexy part. None came, so I will give myself one. DBus uses for in/out parameters a single string each, but splits them for the introspectable interface (where the names are used). sd-bus takes the first path, more functional, and then splits the parameters internally for the XML declaration. Given that, a matching way to declare parameter names is using a 'concatenated' string and splitting it at the same time as the parameters themselves. I have taken this path. > > Adding this certainly makes, if you can come up with macro syntax that > makes this nice to read. I don't know if the macro names are appealing: I just added '_WITH_NAMES' ones, following the '_WITH_OFFSET' already in place. I would like a comment also on this. > > (I'd prefer if this would use \0 or so as separator though maybe, > given it sounds weird compiling in strings that the code first has to > parse, and if \0 is used as separator then things feel more > "pre-parsed" to me) submitted so, with \0 separators. > > Anyway, by all means, please prep a patch set and submit as PR, and we > can continue discussions there!y > > Lennart > Regards, Giacinto _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel