From: Ian G. <ilg...@ya...> - 2012-05-10 12:41:48
|
>I guess this problem affects all software development, but I wouldn't know >that, because I'm not a professional by any means. I guess Rosegarden is my >rude awakening to all the jubilation and glee I missed out on by being a >liberal arts major. > >No great loss. Software is a pain in the ass. >-- >D. Michael McIntyre I guess people like me are part of the problem in this regard, turn up one day, chuck something in to do with linked segments and then f. off into the sunset. Fly-by-night, here today and gone tomorrow contributors :-( While dusting off my jack-midi code I noticed I was also halfway through implementing a scheme for copy/pasting linked segments more flexibly, but I got scared of committing it for fear of bringing the whole pack-o-cards down around my ears. If it's any consolation (which I'm sure it isn't), I'm currently making my living from code development, and the codes I work on which pay my wages are much much MUCH worse than Rosegarden under the hood. Doing it for a living though you do at least get the pleasant face-to-face company of your fellow developers to share a laugh with at tea break time. That helps A LOT. I guess one possible way to ameliorate the "bejeesus, this codebase is an unmaintainable spaghetti!" problem is automated testing. Given that RG is command driven it might be possible to put a command serialisation scheme in place to generate a sort of "composition building script" (basically a dump of the command stack). <Sarcasm> Merely requires a pure virtual serialise() function in the Command class, and the appropriate implementation in all 150,000 commands currently in RG </Sarcasm>. Then if you do some work and the tests still pass, you can't have done too much wrong, even if you don't understand every other part of the code, you just know you haven't broken it too badly. Which part of the whole RG workflow is being the most unstable atm? Composition creation/editing? Recording/playback? Ian. |