Re: [Jsynthlib-devel] some core update

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

> > I think it is more consistent for IBankPatch.delete(int) to put a single
> > patch which createPatch() method of the bank driver uses.
> > BankPatch.createPatch() is an abstract method. core code cannot not know
> > what single patch is filled in by createPatch().  What we can do is to
> > document on IBankPatch.delete(int) method.
> 
> I don't know if I understood you right.
> Yes, IBankPatch.delete should replace the desired bank patch place
> with a new, default single patch.

> Is it possible to evaluate the appropriate SinglePatch.createPatch()
> method from the bank patch?

Yes, it is.
BankEditor.java gets the single driver by
	myModel.getPatchAt(0, 0).getDriver()
First I saw the code, I thought it was tricky.  But it should work well.

> I think it should be possible, because BankDriver knows its Device
> and the singleSysexID of the single patch, which it's holding.

It may be possible to use Device and syngleSysexID but it would be an
expensive way.

> If yes, we could use the single patch createPatch() method to create
> the patch and then we can use the BankDriver.putPatch(Patch bank,
> Patch single, int patchNum) method to replace the old patch from the
> bank patch.  Is it clear?

I think I understand you.

But as I wrote, BankPatch.createPatch() is an abstract method.  We
cannot do what you wrote in core.  What we can do is to document
clearly and to let synth driver developers do that.

> BTW, maybe "erasePatch(int)" is a better name for this purpose than delete(int).
Good idea.
-- 
Hiroo Hayashi