[nama] Re: costs and benefits of singletons
- From: Julien Claassen <julien@xxxxxxxx>
- To: nama@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 18:50:51 +0200 (CEST)
Hello Joel!
Having read this and talked about it with you before, I'd assume this
position: In the long term storing these variables in objects has some good
advantages: Not so many checks for name collisions. Perhaps some protection
against illegal assignments or other manipulation of these variables, by parts
of the code, that aren't allowed to. Not sure how much protection Perl offers
there. then there is general maintainability of the code. Grouping those
variables in the same physical place - so to speak - and having them enclosed
in one object. Then of course you might have an easier task to debug certain
parts of Nama, like only print projec-related variables and states.
I suppose, that with some basic guidance, this could finally be a task in
which I feel really confident to help, since most of it is more or less manual
text processing to make sure. they say, that I am maticulous, when it comes to
these things. In the end, tis should be the matter of a few very basic
examples and the assignment of a list of variables, that need to be
transferred. It's a bit like doing the help or command shortcuts. Yeah, it is
more cumbersome, but not more difficult.
The code being slightly slower wouldn't worry me too much, since the audio
processing task shouldn't be hindered by that, since it's always Ecasound
doing that. Do you know about statistics for the slowing?
Warm regards
Julien
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Such Is Life: Very Intensely Adorable;
Frightening Absence Just Arriving, Reigns Disappeared, Ornate - flowers!
====== Find my music at ======
http://juliencoder.de/nama/music.html
.....................................
"If you live to be 100, I hope I live to be 100 minus 1 day,
so I never have to live without you." (Winnie the Pooh)
Other related posts:
