On 9 January 2012 00:49, D. Michael McIntyre
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 05, 2012, Tom Breton (Tehom) wrote:
>>  * Is anybody sentimentally attached to the MappedSegment / SegmentMapper
>> class arrangement?
>
> That stuff is all a black box to me, so I'm not invested in that arrangement
> at all.

As with so many of the stranger bits of Rosegarden, its design is
largely a historical accident -- initially the GUI and sequencer were
separate programs which communicated through shared-memory areas
mapped onto a file, and these classes managed that shared memory on
either side of the process barrier.

When we merged the two processes into separate threads in a single
process I made what seemed like the smallest possible set of changes
to make the existing design work, by leaving the mapper classes intact
but having them act on a normal region of the heap instead.

I'm pretty sure you won't find anyone who thinks that this is an ideal
arrangement!


Chris

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex
infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to
virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual 
desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure 
costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
[email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel

Reply via email to