[Clam-devel] Re: Finishing Typed Controls Refactoring

[Pau Arumí]

El dj 12 de 11 de 2009 a les 01:22 +0100, en/na David García Garzón va
escriure:
> A Dimecres, 11 de novembre de 2009 20:42:49, vàreu escriure:
> > Today Nael had some problems connecting a FloatOutControl with a
> > TypedOutControl<float>. This was due to the fact we didn't finish the
> > TypedControls refactor and both kinds of controls are connectable but they
> >  are not binary compatible.
> > 
> > The missing part of the refactoring consisted on deprecating In/OutControl
> >  by defining FloatIn/OutControl as TypedIn/OutControl<float> and removing
> >  the old classes.
> > 
> > Today we failed to complete it and the testfarm is in red so sorry for
> >  that. The errors are due, first, to some In/OutControl usage introduced
> >  since the refactor started (should have been FloatIn/OutControl or
> >  In/OutControlBase to be refactor safe). The other error seems related to
> >  ControlPublishers, and in this case i am unable to see the problem. Any
> >  help is welcome.
> 
> Fixed. The problem with the ControlPublisher is that we change the signature 
> of the DoControl method to pass a const reference as parameter, i forgot to 
> update that on the ControlPublisher and the virtual call was not working 
> properly.
> 
> >  After that we will rename TypedIn/OutControl as
> >  In/OutControl<T> to hold the parallelism with In/OutPort<T>.
> 
> That's the only part of the refactoring missing, so we can say godbye to the 
> Typed prefix.
> 
> What to do with FloatIn/OutControl alias? should we use InControl<float> or do 
> we keep that alias? Opinions?

No strong opinion, but I'd opt for keeping the Float* alias, since it is a special type: it have automatic sliders from NE, and ControlSources/Sinks

P