Extract MIXER command into its own file#2839
Conversation
7a6bf92 to
72ca675
Compare
72ca675 to
fc8a19a
Compare
fc8a19a to
ab5b53b
Compare
|
Very nice change! Put that mixer.cpp on a diet 🏃♂️ :-) |
ab5b53b to
f36a9c9
Compare
kcgen
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All looks good from my side. Looking forward to pure float pass-through!
|
Thanks for the review @kcgen 😄 |
Looks like it isn't. I'll see what I can do, probably it's not hard (the English text fits on a single page, btw). |
I think all commands use MORE (right?), so MIXER would be the only one not using it. |
Don't know if all commands use MORE; I think you need to address each command individually. Yeah, when I rewrote the MIXER help, I was shuffling things around until it fit on a single page... the English version 😄 With MORE support, I can add back those blank lines, etc. Thanks for flagging this @Kappa971. |
|
All the commands should have used the MORE engine for displaying help now - unfortunately, it seems I’ve missed MIXER when doing the rework in commit c824679, sorry for this. It’s actually trivial to switch the command to use MORE for help display - see changes to |
Thanks for the tip @FeralChild64, and no worries—everybody misses a few things from time to time 😄 I'm rewriting the MIXER now, so I'll address this as well. |


Prequel to #2468
mixer.cpphas become quite large, so the more things we can move out of it, the better.This incidentally also forced better modularisation and API barriers; the MIXER command can no longer poke in the mixer's internals. 🎉
No functional changes; the MIXER command will be extensively improved as part of #2468, and then it will be properly unit tested (now it's a bit of a mess; half of the bugs are caused by the very loose validation of the CLI input).
Suggest to review commit by commit.