Fixes newly added tracks in BB having wrong size #2883

Stephen-Seo · Jun 30, 2016

This PR is technically a continuation of #2880 , with better fixes made as suggested by @jasp00 .

This bug is mentioned in issue #2476 .

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

@@ -125,6 +125,55 @@ void Pattern::init()

 	changeLength( length() );
 	restoreJournallingState();


init() is also run for the copy constructor, which is correctly initialized. This code should only run for the other constructor and before ensureBeatNotes(), thus before init().

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+	{
+		// Do this per BB for the current Track
+		for(unsigned int tcoIndex = 0; tcoIndex < m_instrumentTrack->getTCOs().size();
+			++tcoIndex)


This should be done only for the TCO the pattern belongs to. You can get the tcoIndex with getTCOs().indexOf(this).

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+			// Get one other track in the currentTrackContainer
+			for(unsigned int trackIndex = 0;
+				trackIndex < currentTrackContainer->tracks().size();
+				++trackIndex)


Track 0 is supposed to have good patterns. New tracks are appended to the end.

Rather than track 0, the first track that is an instrument track.

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+					continue;
+				}
+
+				Pattern * pattern = dynamic_cast<Pattern *>(currentTrackContainer->tracks().at(trackIndex)->getTCO(tcoIndex));


You may use a static_cast if the track is an instrument track.

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 1, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+
+			Pattern * currentPattern = dynamic_cast<Pattern *>(m_instrumentTrack->getTCO(tcoIndex));
+
+			currentPattern->m_steps = steps;


In the end, only one pattern should be fixed, the one running the code.

OK, I've taken the notices from jasp00 and made a fix that should be correct in execution and design. Hopefully this will be the last revision but I am still open to notices and flaws about the code. Many thanks, jasp00!

Stephen-Seo · Jul 1, 2016

OK, I've taken the notices from jasp00 and made a fix that should be correct in execution and design. Hopefully this will be the last revision but I am still open to notices and flaws about the code. Many thanks, jasp00!

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+
+	// Resize this track to be the same as existing tracks in the BB
+	// Only if there already exists at least another track in the BB
+	const TrackContainer::TrackList & tracks = m_instrumentTrack->trackContainer()->tracks();


Try to limit line lengths to 80 characters (coding conventions).

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+	// Resize this track to be the same as existing tracks in the BB
+	// Only if there already exists at least another track in the BB
+	const TrackContainer::TrackList & tracks = m_instrumentTrack->trackContainer()->tracks();
+	if(tracks.size() > 1)


You should remove this check. It will make the algorithm simpler and faster for normal projects.

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+		for(; trackID < tracks.size(); ++trackID)
+		{
+			// skip track that is the same as the current Pattern
+			if(tracks.at(trackID) == static_cast<Track *>(m_instrumentTrack))


When you hit this condition, there are no more instrument tracks. You should simply check that the track is an instrument track; then if the track is different from m_instrumentTrack, m_steps is updated.

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+			}
+			// Found existing InstrumentTrack, thus break
+			else if(tracks.at(trackID)->type() == Track::InstrumentTrack)
+			{


If you update m_steps here, it is true that trackID < tracks.size().

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+		// If trackID is out of bounds, then there is no valid InstrumentTrack
+		// If currentTCO is out of bounds, then a new BB was created and should
+		// have default size
+		if(trackID < tracks.size() && currentTCO < tracks.at(trackID)->numOfTCOs())


currentTCO will be in bounds since the reference track comes before and is already initialized.

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+		// If currentTCO is out of bounds, then a new BB was created and should
+		// have default size
+		if(trackID < tracks.size() && currentTCO < tracks.at(trackID)->numOfTCOs())
+		{


Then, currentTCO's initialization should be here.

Do not spend too much time with commit messages because you should squash commit history later.

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

Do not spend too much time with commit messages because you should squash commit history later.

The reason why I check if "currentTCO" is in bounds, is that when another BB is added, the TCO for that BB doesn't yet exist for the tracks during execution of Pattern's constructor. Since the newly added BB will always have the default length, it is better to check if the "currentTCO" is in bounds and not change "m_steps" if it isn't.

Stephen-Seo · Jul 2, 2016

The reason why I check if "currentTCO" is in bounds, is that when another BB is added, the TCO for that BB doesn't yet exist for the tracks during execution of Pattern's constructor. Since the newly added BB will always have the default length, it is better to check if the "currentTCO" is in bounds and not change "m_steps" if it isn't.

If I ignore bounds checking for "currentTCO", I get a "called Track::getTCO( 3 ), but TCO 3 doesn't exist"

Stephen-Seo · Jul 2, 2016

If I ignore bounds checking for "currentTCO", I get a "called Track::getTCO( 3 ), but TCO 3 doesn't exist"

If you are satisfied with the current changes, then I will sqash commit history, but until then I will keep on refactoring.

Stephen-Seo · Jul 2, 2016

If you are satisfied with the current changes, then I will sqash commit history, but until then I will keep on refactoring.

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+		m_instrumentTrack->trackContainer()->tracks();
+	for(unsigned int trackID = 0; trackID < tracks.size(); ++trackID)
+	{
+		if(tracks.at(trackID)->type() == Track::InstrumentTrack &&


You should break on this condition. The reference track should be before the current track, not after. Then, you can remove the bounds check for currentTCO. It should look like:

if(type) if(not same track) update steps break

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+		if(tracks.at(trackID)->type() == Track::InstrumentTrack &&
+			tracks.at(trackID) != m_instrumentTrack)
+		{
+			int currentTCO = m_instrumentTrack->getTCOs().indexOf(this);


When limiting the line to 80 characters, remember that one tab equals to 8 spaces.

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 · Jul 2, 2016

src/tracks/Pattern.cpp

+				break;
+			}
+			m_steps = static_cast<Pattern *>
+				(tracks.at(trackID)->getTCO(currentTCO))->m_steps;


80 characters.

Let's please stop with the 80 character requirement. It just makes the code ugly. I realize the wiki offers it as a recommendation, but there's very little benefit in enforcing it anymore.

tresf · Jul 2, 2016

Let's please stop with the 80 character requirement. It just makes the code ugly. I realize the wiki offers it as a recommendation, but there's very little benefit in enforcing it anymore.

I usually had used "set expandtab", "set tabstop=4" and "set shiftwidth=4" in my vim config.
I knew to disable "set expandtab" to avoid mistabbing things but didn't realize that they count for 8 spaces. The fix should be good now?

Also, is it safe to squelch commits into one commit within the bb_bugfix branch or will I need to do it in a new branch and a new PR? (I won't be doing it until it's truely fixed.)

Stephen-Seo · Jul 3, 2016

I usually had used "set expandtab", "set tabstop=4" and "set shiftwidth=4" in my vim config.
I knew to disable "set expandtab" to avoid mistabbing things but didn't realize that they count for 8 spaces. The fix should be good now?

Also, is it safe to squelch commits into one commit within the bb_bugfix branch or will I need to do it in a new branch and a new PR? (I won't be doing it until it's truely fixed.)

The fix is good. You can squash commits within the bb_bugfix branch. Try git rebase -i HEAD~10 (10 commits).

jasp00 · Jul 3, 2016

The fix is good. You can squash commits within the bb_bugfix branch. Try git rebase -i HEAD~10 (10 commits).

The fix is good. You can squash commits within the bb_bugfix branch. Try git rebase -i HEAD~10 (10 commits).

FYI, @jasp00 GitHub provides a "Squash and merge" button now.

tresf · Jul 3, 2016

The fix is good. You can squash commits within the bb_bugfix branch. Try git rebase -i HEAD~10 (10 commits).

FYI, @jasp00 GitHub provides a "Squash and merge" button now.

Tested this out, works beautifully.
The only thing is that the new track is always the same size as the first track. Now, you can edit out the first track's length using the context menu, and every new track would have that new length, despite all the other tracks having a different length.

But I don't see this is as an issue, and also making the new track adding system more "intelligent" probably isn't worth it, and in most cases this fix works like a charm. So this gets a 👍 from me for a merge.

Umcaruje · Jul 5, 2016

Tested this out, works beautifully.
The only thing is that the new track is always the same size as the first track. Now, you can edit out the first track's length using the context menu, and every new track would have that new length, despite all the other tracks having a different length.

But I don't see this is as an issue, and also making the new track adding system more "intelligent" probably isn't worth it, and in most cases this fix works like a charm. So this gets a 👍 from me for a merge.

TBH @Umcaruje, I did not notice patterns could be changed individually. In this case, the default number of steps could be saved in BB tracks, as suggested by @Stephen-Seo.

jasp00 · Jul 6, 2016

TBH @Umcaruje, I did not notice patterns could be changed individually. In this case, the default number of steps could be saved in BB tracks, as suggested by @Stephen-Seo.

I don't really think it's necessary to have different lengths for different samples, so maybe the context menu action should be removed or changed to affect all samples

Spekular · Jul 6, 2016

I don't really think it's necessary to have different lengths for different samples, so maybe the context menu action should be removed or changed to affect all samples

Fixes newly added tracks in BB having wrong size

892970d

tresf merged commit 652aa5e into LMMS:master Jul 5, 2016
1 check passed

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

jasp00 referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2016
Merged
Resize only patterns from BB editor #2917

Umcaruje referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2016
Closed
Inconsistent steps on Beat/Bassline #1651

irrenhaus3 referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2016
Closed
Beat/Bassline tracks and editor don't behave as expected #2476
1 of 2 tasks complete

LMMS/lmms

Join GitHub today

Fixes newly added tracks in BB having wrong size #2883

Conversation

Stephen-Seo commented Jun 30, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

Stephen-Seo commented Jul 1, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 commented Jul 2, 2016

This comment has been minimized.

Stephen-Seo commented Jul 2, 2016

This comment has been minimized.

Stephen-Seo commented Jul 2, 2016

This comment has been minimized.

Stephen-Seo commented Jul 2, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016 View changes

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

tresf commented Jul 2, 2016

This comment has been minimized.

Stephen-Seo commented Jul 3, 2016 • edited Edited 1 time Stephen-Seo edited Jul 3, 2016 (most recent)

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 commented Jul 3, 2016

This comment has been minimized.

tresf commented Jul 3, 2016 • edited Edited 1 time tresf edited Jul 3, 2016 (most recent)

This comment has been minimized.

Umcaruje commented Jul 5, 2016

Hide details View details tresf merged commit 652aa5e into LMMS:master Jul 5, 2016 1 check passed

1 check passed

This comment has been minimized.

jasp00 commented Jul 6, 2016

This comment has been minimized.

Spekular commented Jul 6, 2016

jasp00 referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2016

Umcaruje referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2016

irrenhaus3 referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2016

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 1, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

jasp00 reviewed Jul 2, 2016

View changes

Stephen-Seo commented Jul 3, 2016 •

edited

Edited 1 time

Stephen-Seo edited Jul 3, 2016 (most recent)

tresf commented Jul 3, 2016 •

edited

Edited 1 time

tresf edited Jul 3, 2016 (most recent)

tresf merged commit `652aa5e` into LMMS:master Jul 5, 2016
1 check passed