[nama] Re: Logging
- From: Joel Roth <joelz@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: nama@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:09:53 -1000
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 04:01:47PM -0400, S. Massy wrote:
> Shortly after discovering and beginning to use nama, I remember
> attempting to read some of the code and finding it very rough going. In
> the last week or so, while debugging ecasound, I've had several pokes
> around nama's code, and I found it much easier to know where to look and
> figure out what was doing what and where. So, all in all, I'd say you're
> right.
Although my fingers have gotten pretty used to typing grep 'sub foo' *p *pl
I just rediscovered ctags, which is way easier.
cd ~/build/nama/src
ctags --languages=Perl --langmap=Perl:.p.pl *p *pl
(Perhaps that could go into the build script.)
Then in vim, hitting Ctrl-] on a function name jumps to the
file and position where the function is defined.
Also, whenever I go back to something and find it confusing,
I try to add enough comments to figure it out the *next*
time. Or actually clean up the code.
It might be interesting to document a simple example of the steps
from track settings to routing graph, to chain setup.
For now, fine-grained logging is a good step in
that direction.
Best,
> Cheers,
> S.M.
>
--
Joel Roth
Other related posts:
