Re: When C++, and when scheme

[Michael Welsh Duggan]

Michael Welsh Duggan <address@hidden> writes:

> Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> address@hidden writes:
>>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
>>> >   * Then I add simple constructions, such as stress on the 1st note of a
>>> >   slur/1st note of a bar.  I should do some reading up on what are the
>>> >   most important facets of getting a credible performance.
>>> 
>>> Okay.  I'll make a first pass at Snobs, then.  Shouldn't be too hard,
>>> and not all that different from what I was doing in the first place.
>>> I'll start by stealing the property code from Grobs, then add the
>>> other functionality when it turns out that I need it.  My goal is to
>>> start simple, and only add complexity when necessary.
>>
>> OK. My original plan was for the snobs to also have a parent like
>> structure like grobs, perhaps with callbacks. Each snob has a parent
>> determining the timing. So, when you create an Arpeggio, all notes
>> have their parent set to the Arpeggio, and to determine the onset of
>> the note, the callback for the Arpeggio is executed, which shifts
>> different notes in the chord.
>>
>> Don't know if its a good idea, though.
>
> No, that sounds similar to some ideas I had.  The major bit I am
> unsure about is if the heavyweight event interface is necessary.

In order to reuse as much grob code as possible, I have been
seperating out things which are common between Grobs and Snobs into a
base object (Probs - property objects).  The first major hurdle I have
hit is that of interfaces.  I am having difficulty deciding whether
interfaces should be the domain of grobs only, whether there should be
a seperate set for snobs, or whether a single unified set should
suffice for both.  Would you have any insights into this question?

-- 
Michael Welsh Duggan
(address@hidden)