From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MJV2d-0000Rp-8i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:09:43 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MJV2Y-0000JQ-O5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:09:42 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42289 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MJV2Y-0000JF-F8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:09:38 -0400 Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:36812) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MJV2X-0003iw-Sg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:09:38 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:09:27 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 01/11] QMP: Introduce specification file Message-ID: <20090624160927.GC14121@shareable.org> References: <4A40FE31.2010007@us.ibm.com> <4A40FFB0.2070905@redhat.com> <4A411FC5.7050701@us.ibm.com> <4A412339.5000109@redhat.com> <4A412659.1080803@us.ibm.com> <20090623220204.GA5612@snarc.org> <4A415C30.7030301@us.ibm.com> <20090624010108.GA6537@snarc.org> <4A42200C.6060600@codemonkey.ws> <19010.11102.28799.518165@mariner.uk.xensource.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19010.11102.28799.518165@mariner.uk.xensource.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Ian Jackson Cc: ehabkost@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, dlaor@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Luiz Capitulino , Avi Kivity , Vincent Hanquez Ian Jackson wrote: > I think dbus would be a good choice, but even XML-RPC (which, frankly, > is flabby, overcomplex, slow, hard to read, etc.), JSON (which doesn't > have an IDL that can even do checking), and ASN.1/DER/BER (which is a > complexity nightmare) would be an improvement over no automatic > parsing machinery. I strongly dislike D-Bus, having been forced to use it to manage Linux Bluetooth connections. (The old way with a nice traditional unix-style executable command to control them was far nicer and actually worked). D-Bus is impossible to use properly from shell with the available shell client (some value types aren't supported), and you have to read application source code to figure out what calls to use, if the applications RPCs aren't well documented (which they aren't for Linux Bluetooth). There's no useful introspection. D-Bus seems to be ok for asynchronous notifications, such as what's used to update icons on a desktop in response to background events. But it's not at all transactional so you often have temporary display inconsistencies in a GUI using it. -- Jamie