On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 17:17 +0200, R. Mattes wrote: > On Mon, 09 May 2011 10:19:57 +0100, Richard Shann wrote > > > Yes - I think I understand the general picture you have painted. > > There would be quite a bit of code to re-work in the C (all the > > stuff getting scripted commands at runtime, error handling), but we > > would then be in good shape then to move on to byte-compiled scheme. > > As, usual, we lack the developer-time :( > > > > Just to mention it: I've started to write up a draft on hook based > input handling -
This sounds really great. I should mention that up until recently I did not consider making a round trip to scheme for every note played on the MIDI keyboard as the handling of MIDI-in was in a very bad state. The code still has the response to all note on and off messages routed in C to actions while other messages call a scheme hook (interpreted strings ...) There is a similar story with pc-keyboard in for which I wrote a proposal http://denemo.org/index.php/Scheme_hook_for_keyboard_input It may be that we will need to make scheme hooks for MIDI note events optional - else playing-in at full speed may not work properly on slower machines. Richard > first and foremost to force myself into a formal process > of design. I've also started on a first implementation - currently one > that only runs the hook and then continues with your code - I'm just > to lazzy to port all of that code before an API freeze :-) > The nice thing: input handling code would be much terser and more modular. > Draft is at: http://www.denemo.org/index.php/InputFrameWorkReloaded > code currently only in my local git. > > > > -- > R. Mattes - > Hochschule fuer Musik Freiburg > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ Denemo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/denemo-devel
