On Tuesday 26 April 2016 10:05:26 Ted Felix wrote: > On 04/26/2016 09:46 AM, David Faure wrote: > > So the "sequencer" is the thing that plays an entire piece in the > > background ? > > Yes. > > > I notice, though, that with --no-sequencer, > > RosegardenDocument::initialiseStudio() > > is not called. Is it still OK to play sounds then? > > Probably not. In fact, I just tested it with a sequence with two > synths, and the second one doesn't work in this situation. So, this is > a feature/bug.
I'm confused by "feature/bug" and by the fact that, if you meant bug, it contradicts your first reply where you said --no-sequencer should NOT disable all sounds output. What's the conclusion? Should --no-sequencer disable all sounds output? > > In fact, from what you say, I wonder: is --no-sequencer still useful for > > anything, or can we clean it up? > > It doesn't appear to save on CPU usage which is my main area of > interest. It looks like the audio subsystem is still churning away > sucking up CPU. > > I don't see the point then. I would wait for Chris and Michael to > weigh in before undertaking any cleanup. They may have some historic > perspective that will help make the right decision. > > > 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). > > Running rg in some sort of minimal no audio/no MIDI mode might indeed > be useful to someone. We do have a Windows port that has no sound > support (IIRC). So, that might come in handy on that side. > > > 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). > > This might be used by the Windows port. It might be set by the > Windows solution/project files. Right, but then this would indeed be about disabling all sound output, not just the sequencer. How about I rename --no-sequencer to --no-sound, so we have only one concept (I would then merge isSoundEnabled() and isSequencerRunning() since it's the same concept). -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, 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 Rosegarden-devel@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
