On Sunday 08 October 2006 18:31, DJ Delorie wrote: > > OTOH, using the Raw C binding (as I started out trying to) does give the > > advantage of being able to work with Lesstif, etc.. IIRC, you need to > > add the file descriptor which DBUS uses for comms into the main GUI's > > poll / select loop to avoid having to poll manually and consume lots of > > CPU cycles. > > This would be a far better option. Xt has a hook for watching a file > descriptor (XtAppAddInput); Gtk should too. We can add a hook to the > HID structure, something like: > > hidval watch_file (int fd, void *user_data, void (*callback)(int, void > *)); void unwatch_file (hidval which); > > If using the raw C binding gets us Windows and generic Posix (solaris, > OS/X, etc), I'd rather use that.
On the other hand, using the raw C binding means lots of complicated code which is going to be difficult to maintain... I feel that this discussion is getting somewhat circular. The options for D-Bus as I see it are: - Use dbus-glib and make the D-Bus system part of the GTK+ HID, requiring a couple of hundred lines of simple code. - Use libdbus and make the D-Bus system part of core (and thus available to all GUIs), requiring a couple of thousand lines of less-than-simple code. The nice thing about the current D-Bus patch is that it can be maintained by someone with a copy of the dbus-glib reference and 5 minutes to read the code, whereas something using the low-level libdbus stuff is definitely *not* going to be so easy (or they wouldn't have written a glib binding in the first place). Peter -- Fisher Society committee http://tinyurl.com/o39w2 CUSBC novices, match and league secretary http://tinyurl.com/mwrc9 v3sw6YChw7$ln3pr6$ck3ma8u7+Lw3+2m0l7Ci6e4+8t4Gb8en6g6Pa2Xs5Mr4p4 hackerkey.com peter-b.co.uk
pgpOXBxgCZ9rw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
