On 23 Oct 2015, at 19:56, Florian Bomers <javasound-...@bome.com> wrote:
> Hi Sergey, > > I guess you're right and the second loop will never be executed if we > will always have the default mixer providers. > > Removing the NPE catch clause, however, will still cause a backwards > incompatibility, because if a poorly programmed MixerProvider gets > installed which throws NPE for whatever reason (might also happen when > "info" is non-null), now AudioSystem.getMixer() will throw NPE, where > it previously worked. > > I agree that it's harder for debugging mixer providers if NPE is > ignored. Other than that, I don't see any problem with keeping the NPE > catch for backwards compatibility's sake. Even if just theoretical... > But you never now, companies might be using poorly programmed in-house > software or the like. > > Thanks, > Florian So, it's broken if you do the right thing and it's broken if you don't?? There comes a point in any software project where years of cumulative amendments, fixes and modifications make the code so fragile that it's no longer modifiable. Personally, I've always thought the concept of a mixer is flawed, because it's inherently a non-portable concept, which should be anathema in a language that has portability as its main goal. The Mixer SPI only works when the programmer writing the code actually understands what's going on and the implications of any choice - and frankly, how often does that happen? When I write a graphics program, I don't have to worry about the specific capabilities of the specific video card on the user's specific computer - all that detail is (quite rightly) hidden from me. And because it's hidden from me, my program works on any desktop/laptop computer. When I write a Java Sound program, I want the same level of simplicity. It should be possible, because sound is inherently simpler than video - yet Java Sound makes it far more complex. Is it time to freeze and deprecate the existing Java Sound, and start again with a new design, with cross platform portability as its major aim? Bob --
