Re: [Jsynthlib-devel] Re: [jsynthlib-dev] Commit

[<tt_...@gm...>]

Hi Hiroo,

Hiroo Hayashi wrote:
> Torsten,
> 
> 
>>>Last two days I was out of town, I've not see the recent changes yet.
>>>
>>>If I understand correctly we will not use Patch class in core anymore
>>>(except in Patch class itself). 
>>>
>>>The second change should be;
>>>       IPatch pk = patarray[k];
>>
>>OK, but IPatch doesn't know the sysex byte array yet.
>>
>>So we run into trouble while compiling because the following call failes:
>>
>>line 206-209:
>>
>>pk.setComment("Probably a "
>>                         + LookupManufacturer.get(pk.sysex[1],
>>                                                  pk.sysex[2],
>>                                                  pk.sysex[3])
>>                         + " Patch, Size: " + pk.sysex.length);
> 
> 
> When I wrote my reply I did not realize this problem.  But now this
> can be solved by getByteArray() as Rib wrote.
> 
> But what shall we do for the line 165 of SysexGetDialog.java.
> 
>     Patch p = new Patch(patchSysex, driver);
> 
> I think we need IPatchDriver.newPatch(byte[]) method.
> 
> # IPatchDriver is the interface for single patch driver and bank patch
> # driver.
> 
> By introducing IPatch interface, a driver can have its own patch
> class.  To enjoy the merit, we will need
> IPatchDriver.newPatch(byte[]).
> 
> Any comments? > all

If I understood your previous proposals to the interfaces right, IPatchDriver will collect all methods which are needed for library
functions.
So IPatchDriver will also have a definition of createNewPatch. Am I right?
 From this point it would be clever to define also a function IPatchDriver.newPatch(...). I don't know if we need several newPatch(...)
methods with different parameters like (byte[]), (byte[], Driver), ...

Bye
Torsten