Hi Hermann,

I was busy ferrying a non-driving friend around yesterday so didn't get much
time to look at the code then.

It was me that changed the effect's graph to horizontal lines. This was to get
rid of those weird discontinuities, which seem to be due to the FLTK drawing
routines not handling lines that are more than one pixel wide and offset
vertically by fractional amounts. It seems to look better for everything
except peak style, especially when the window is scaled up. As 4k screens
become more cost-effective we can expect users to migrate to them and they will
want to scale up by at least 2x.

I noticed an oddity when loading instruments with EQ either from banks, or a
copy loaded with 'Instrument._Load External...". with 'Companion/Stopped Pipe'
it sometimes shows a straight line for the graph (low shelf), with
'Collection/Bright Rushes' it shows the wrong shape. With both of these, just
nudge one of the controls and it jumps to the correct shape.

These are immediately correct when loaded as a startup with './yoshimi
-L={filename}'.

>Hi Will,
>
>meanwhile I learned a bit more about LV2 and managed to debug the
>LV2 plugin while running under Qtractor. This allowed me to see
>how the threads and the UI-start are actually handled.
>Basically everything was operating as I had expected from theory.
>
>This allowed me then to do those (actually quite minimal) adjustments
>to make the LV2 plugin also use the new UI launch scheme with the
>"root-Anchor" for the UI sent over the GuiDataExchange channel.

Checked this with my test files for Ardour, Muse, Qtractor - all seem fine :)

>While there are a lot of follow-up questions and things to clean-up
>left, the state on my Git branch is now reasonably feature complete
>for an first attempt towards testing and integration.
>
>So the question is how best to proceed.
>Obviously, you could give the branch a quick test already.
>An idea might be also that I just clean-up the Git history a bit,
>squash some changesets together and present this as a pull-request.

Yes with the above that seems a good idea. The above mentioned issue needs
sorting, but I don't think is a show-stopper

>I would then use a further Git branch for follow-up clean up and
>possible bugfixes, while you could start with your work on Config...
>We are early in a release cycle, so there is ample time to sort out
>any serious problems (and if we hit a real roadblock, I would be able,
>with the help of "git rebase" to back out my changes while preserving
>your work). Does this sound reasonable?
>
>-- Hermann

Yes, that's fine. It allows us both to carry on and continuously test.
I always use the current master when composing music, so all changes get a
real-world test before anyone else gets their hands on it.

-- 
Will J Godfrey


_______________________________________________
Yoshimi-devel mailing list
Yoshimi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yoshimi-devel

Reply via email to