On 05/02/21 10:41, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
The essential changes also exposed a lot of very inefficient
algorithms. For example, if you make a new connection between
two clients that are already connected then there is no need
to recompute the running order, but it was done anyway just
because the existing logic required it. It doesn't matter if
you have just a few clients with a few ports. But this doesn't
scale well to bigger systems. So I decided to fix that at the
same time. That's probably why the patch was rejected.
The patch was rejected because it contained superfluous whitespace
changes, code style changes that did no changes to the actual code and
other things typical of a "here is a big patch which I didnt bother
cleanup" dump of a diff.
Paul Davis went to the trouble of converting the *entire* jack1 codebase
with an automated code styling tool (so all the code would have the same
rules on coding style) just so we could have your patch in the codebase.
Idea of the process being:
1. convert entire jack1 code to a specific style [1]
2. apply your (unclean) patch in a different jack1 copy and convert that
entire codebase too
3. make a diff out of the 2 to have a clean patch [2]
It turns out the end result did not work well, so it had to be reverted [3]
There would have been no issues if the patch was properly made from the
start.
Paul went to the extra effort of cleaning up the entire codebase just to
accept the patch from you, but somehow that didnt work (why exactly I
dont know).
[1]
https://github.com/jackaudio/jack1/commit/c758cdf4f6e959b92683f2dba6ce8617ac4f0a83
[2]
https://github.com/jackaudio/jack1/commit/423931219dd3e3b669fde97786cadae92c066dc1
[3]
https://github.com/jackaudio/jack1/commit/ea78c7e06e768a02d6129c43c51473a7f94cfd73
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
