Re: When C++, and when scheme

[Michael Welsh Duggan]

Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden writes:
>> >>> 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?
>
> I'd refrain from trying to be too generic when it's not clear that you
> will need it. Don't put in interfaces, and once you really need them,
> let them bubble up from the Grob class.

Sounds good.  So for the meantime, I am running without interfaces.  I
do have one more question.  I am also running without Object_keys for
now, as I have not yet been able to determine for what purpose they
are used.  Is there a good reason to include these?

-- 
Michael Welsh Duggan
(address@hidden)