Re: [SyncEvolution] C++ D-Bus bindings + blocking calls

On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 12:39 +0100, Krzesimir Nowak wrote: > 2012/2/14 Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com&gt;: > > We could use an empty tuple to handle a void return type. Same for a > > single return value. But the result wouldn't be very natural: the empty > > tuple could be ignored by the caller, but the single-value very much > > should be the return value, not some tuple containing it. > > > >> This is an idea, so I have no idea if it will work. :) Especially when > >> Return_t is void. > > > > Exactly :-( > > > > Got different idea about this yesterday at home - maybe we could just > use traits class for DBusClientCall. Traits struct would describe > callback type and return type. For void it would some empty struct > like struct VoidReturn {}; That should work. It's a pity that the "void" type is treated differently than other types. Anyway, I also went ahead and implemented the brute-force approach of duplicating different operators this morning. See for-master/dbus-blocking. We can replace that with a more elegant implementation later.

-- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.