Re: [Jsynthlib-devel] Interfaces

[Hiroo H. <hir...@co...>]

Hi Rib,

I have to go office soon.  Quick answer.

Rib> Hi Hiroo.  I have a couple questions/comments about these changes.
Rib> First, in Patch(byte[], int) it looks like it should be
Rib> System.arraycopy(sysex, offset, this.sysex, 0, sysex.length - offset);
Rib> instead of
Rib> System.arraycopy(sysex, offset, sysex, 0, sysex.length - offset);
You are correct.  But now Patch(byte[], int) is not used by my last
change.  We can remove this constructor.

Rib> Also, I was thinking it might be better to have
Rib> IPatchDriver.supportsMessage so that each message can be checked
Rib> instead of just whatever's at the beginning.  Then it would probably
Sorry, I don't understand the purpose of this method.  Does this check
if IPatch.getDriver() returned correct value?  (I guess this is wrong.)

Rib> be better to have something like Patch.chooseDriver(SysexMessage[])
Rib> and Patch.valueOf(SysexMessage[]). Should these be final?
I did not defined them just because I did not need them to reimplement
the current JSynthLib.  If we need them, let's define.

I've not sure this is the case, but I agree with you we should use more
'final' properly.  It will help synth driver developers.

Rib> I had one other question about Converter, but I figured it out. 
Rib> Should I go back include my changes to my Converter extend Object now?
I'm not sure.

If Converter extends Object (not Driver), don't you have to make change
the subclasses of the Converter?  I start thinking Driver, BankDriver,
Convert, and Patch classes are for compatibility.  I guess you may need
AbstractConverter class.  I also think we may need AbstractPatch class
for common methods of Patch and XMLPatch class.

Rib> I was working on the xml driver today. I'd guess it's about 40% done.  
Good to hear!
-- 
Hiroo Hayashi