Ryan Lortie wrote: > Dan Winship wrote: >> (Alternate possibility: add a way to include type tags, so that callers >> and callees can agree that a particular "x" is to be treated as a time_t >> and not a generic int64. Eg, a signature of ":x" would mean a (string) >> type tag followed by an int64, but it would be distinct from "sx" or >> "(sx)".) > > Are you proposing that this would be a standard modification to DBus > itself?
No, that would be better than what I was suggesting. I was just suggesting that either (a) GVariant should be renamed to make it clear that it's D-Bus-specific, not a generic type system, or else (b) it should be extended to make it *not* D-Bus-specific. (Although I guess we'd at least want to ensure that whatever extension syntax it used would not conflict with anything in D-Bus in the future.) -- Dan _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
