Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread Kristian Amlie
On 03.06.2025 12:25, Will Godfrey wrote: On Sat, 31 May 2025 10:55:39 +0100 Will Godfrey wrote: On Sat, 31 May 2025 10:47:21 +0200 Kristian Amlie wrote: On 30.05.2025 20:38, Will Godfrey wrote: I'm thinking of protecting against losing changed but unsaved instruments with the following: S

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread Will Godfrey
On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 09:55:21 +0200 Kristian Amlie wrote: > >I gave this a quick spin, and here are my findings: > >* It seems to work pretty well in general. As expected, I'd say, nothing >is better than that! > >* In particular, loading a patch from the UI produces the warning, but >loading via

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread ichthyo
On 04.06.25 10:45, Will Godfrey wrote: I've not done any deep dives there for a very long time, and see that two heavily used functions, sendDirect (39) and sendNormal (119) have been moved entirely into a header file. I don't understand why this was done. These are quite substantial functions, a

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread HIV
Short summary: I placed these functions into a separate header, because they are *stateless*. That is, one piece less complexity in the CmdInterpreter. Some further context info to that change from 2019 https://github.com/Yoshimi/yoshimi/pull/56 The actual commit to extract these functions,

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread ichthyo
On 03.06.25 12:25, Will Godfrey wrote: I hasten to add I won't be attempting to get this in place for LAC! Well... actually... I couldn't resist at least having a quick look at this just to see if it was at least viable and one thing led to another. There is a branch, 'parts'. This is complet

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread ichthyo
On 04.06.25 19:53, ichthyo wrote: (3) the new field InterChange::partsChange is needlessly public.     Please make it private, to prevent any "convenient" grab at     that field from the outside. This helps to reduce complexity. And additionally, this field was intended to be static in the c

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread ichthyo
...and yet another minor point InterChange.cpp, line 1413 case CONFIG::control::saveCurrentConfig: if (write) { text = synth.getRuntime().configFile; if (synth.getRuntime().saveInstanceConfig()) {

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments // CLI confirmation

2025-06-04 Thread Ichthyostega via Yoshimi-devel
On 04.06.25 10:45, Will Godfrey wrote: There is a bit of a puzzle when looking at the CLI for control. ...functions, sendDirect and sendNormal ... These would be the obvious place for monitoring changes, otherwise it becomes a line-by-line examination :( Regarding the topic of CLI : how t

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread ichthyo
On 04.06.25 20:46, ichthyo wrote: And additionally, this field was intended to be static in the class InterChange, so that it is shared over all InterChange instances for all SynthEngine instances, correct? On second consideration... What do we actually want? Do we want /a single/ "dirty" stat

Re: [Yoshimi-devel] Following on with Instruments

2025-06-04 Thread ichthyo
On 04.06.25 10:45, Will Godfrey wrote: These would be the obvious place for monitoring changes, otherwise it becomes a line-by-line examination :( On 04.06.25 20:41, Ichthyostega via Yoshimi-devel wrote: So that should be doable with some hours of focussed attention. ...after my night round