Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de> writes:

> Daiki Ueno <ueno@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Certainly.  Do you have any preference on the alternative form?  My
>> example used the `:type' keyword, but it was a tentative plan and might
>> be too verbose for programmers.  Reusing `:signature' might be a better
>> idea as you mentioned (though it might be confusing with the current
>> meaning of `:signature' as a D-Bus type "g").
>
> I'm OK with :type, as you said it is similar to what defcustom
> offers. :signature would be confusing indeed, when it means Lisp
> objects instead of a signature string.

Sorry for the long delay.  I have tried to implement it (patch
attached).  It basically adds a couple of new functions:

- xd_type_spec_to_signature(char *, Lisp_Object)
- xd_append_arg_with_type_spec(Lisp_Object, Lisp_Object, DBusMessageIter *)

which are similar to xd_signature and xd_append_arg, but take a
Lisp_Object denoting an argument type.

Comments appreciated.

Regards,
-- 
Daiki Ueno