On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:51:51AM +0100, Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
> i'm sure the biggest problem here is the braindead snapshot feature which
> doesn't do what you really want ootb. and the keyword here is the ootb;)
>
> suppose you have this connection scenario:
>
> client_a:out_1 -> client_b:in_3
> client_a:out_2 -> client_b:in_4
> client_a:out_3 -> client_b:in_2
> client_a:out_4 -> client_b:in_1
>
> then the snapshot will make it like:
>
> socket_a -> socket_b
> client_a client_b
> out_1 in_1
> out_2 in_2
> out_3 in_3
> out_4 in_4
This example would suggest that the connection made are
based on the lexicographical order of the ports, as they
are displayed. But this is in general *not* the case.
The snapshot seems to use the *unsorted* list.
If client b has an additional port, let's say 'test',
(it would be the 5th one in the list, after in_4),
the connection made could as well be:
socket_a -> socket_b
client_a client_b
out_1 test
out_2 in_1
out_3 in_2
out_4 in_3
The same happens when you make the connections selecting
the two apps instead of the ports: the order does not in
general correspond to the one that is displayed.
>From the user's point of view, the mapping is just random.
> imho, the big question is not whether the patchbay model doesn't fit to
> all purposes, but whether the current super-naive snapshot mapping is any
> better than not having one :)
I still faill to understand why the snapshot can't do what its name
suggests it will do: make a copy of the existing connections.
If a human user is supposed to be able to create a patchbay
corresponding to a given set of connection, by folllowing
some procedure, why can a piece of software not do the same ?
In particular if said procedure is supposed to be simple and
intuitive.
Ciao,
--
FA
Laboratorio di Acustica ed Elettroacustica
Parma, Italia
Lascia la spina, cogli la rosa.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
