Re: [Rosegarden-devel] Enharmonics patch...

[Chris C. <ca...@al...>]

On Tuesday 07 January 2003 18:29, Silvan wrote:
> I'll try again.

Looks OK, except that you want std::string instead of just string at=20
373 and std::cout instead of cout at 419.  (Different compilers and=20
standard libraries have different expectations for the namespaces you=20
have to explicitly declare; older compilers [gcc-2.95.x] make std=20
implicit, newer ones [gcc-3.x] don't.)  You should probably terminate=20
that cout with "<< std::endl" instead of "<< "\n"" as well.

Also your indentation's a bit wack, as I guess we all thought it would=20
be from your comments about ours.  Most of the new lines you've added=20
appear to be indented significantly less than the lines surrounding=20
them.

And for us XEmacs users, writing

  } else
  if {

will cause strange results after any re-indentation we might do during=20
editing in the future -- the "if" will get indented four spaces=20
further than the "} else".  That problem's avoided by putting the=20
else and if on the same line.  Guess it depends on just how much you=20
like your layout.

(What editor are you using?)

I haven't actually _tried_ the code -- at this stage I'm inclined to=20
take your word for it that it works, as you're more likely to have=20
meaningful test cases than I.  I will give it all a good go in the=20
near future though (probably after I've dealt with this notation=20
quantization stuff).

Commit it if you like -- lots of FIXMEs and debug stuff in there as=20
well, but I don't think we object to committing work-in-progress so=20
long as it isn't completely broken and we think you really are going=20
to continue working on it.  Hans is probably more likely to have=20
objections than I am, if he has the time to look at it.


Chris