Hi Ted, Thanks for your clarifications. Of course they trigger more questions from me :-)
On Tuesday 26 April 2016 09:15:37 Ted Felix wrote: > I believe you are confusing concepts. > > The "no sequencer" thing may have been for debugging the UI without > the unstable, in-progress sequencer thread getting in the way. So the "sequencer" is the thing that plays an entiere piece in the background ? I notice, though, that with --no-sequencer, RosegardenDocument::initialiseStudio() is not called. Is it still OK to play sounds then? In fact, from what you say, I wonder: is --no-sequencer still useful for anything, or can we clean it up? Finally, would it make sense for me to add setSoundEnabled(bool) / bool isSoundEnabled() to RosegardenDocument ? I guess only the unittest would use that then, unless we see a need for a command-line arg that disables sound usage altogether (e.g. for people with a crash in libjack, who just want to write and print music). I found a #ifdef NO_SOUND in the code that seemed related to this idea, but it's not set anywhere (-> I'll clean it up). -- David Faure, [email protected], http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE Frameworks 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications Manager Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple tiers of your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial! https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
