[Jsynthlib-devel] Generic driver vs null driver

[Joe E. <jo...@em...>]

If you have a patch in your library that isn't recognized by JSL, it
says the driver is "Unknown" and sets the comment to "Probably a #####
patch. Size: ####". If you try to *receive* a patch that isn't
recognized *into* your library, JSLis supposed to do that as well, but
doesn't even get that far. It throws an exception.

When searching through the code, I discovered that there are *two*
places where the "Probably a ##### patch..." comment is set, depending
upon whether the patch was loaded from a library, or received via sysex:

in AbstractLibraryFrame:
    private void chooseDriver(IPatch patch) {
        patch.setDriver();
        if (patch.hasNullDriver()) {
            // Unkown patch, try to guess at least the manufacturer
            patch.setComment("Probably a "
                    + patch.lookupManufacturer()
                    + " Patch, Size: " + patch.getSize());
        }
    }

and in Driver.fixPatch:
        // driver not found
        pk.setDriver(null); //reset
        pk.setComment("Probably a "
                + pk.lookupManufacturer()
                + " Patch, Size: " + pk.getByteArray().length);
        JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(null, "You requested a "
                + this.toString() + " patch!"
                + "\nBut you got a not supported patch!\n" +
pk.getComment(),
                "Warning", JOptionPane.WARNING_MESSAGE);

This (having two bits of code trying to do the same type of job) is
probably not a good idea.

I propose a few changes which could clean this up:
 - If no driver accepts a patch, instead of setting the driver to null,
it is set to the GenericDriver.
 - The GenericDriver will have the code that sets the comment to
"Probably a ##### patch..."

- Joe