Polymorphism in OSC is allowed, it's good and bad for all the same
reasons that it is in programming languages. Use your common sense.
Liblo's API was designed to make polymorphism easy, but don't take
that as an implicit recommendation :)
- Steve
On 10 Dec 2007, at 12:46, Fred Gleason wrote:
Howdy Folks:
I'm in the midst of laying out an OSC namespace for a new app, and
have come
across a couple of places where it might make sense to 'overload'
different
argument parameters onto the same command node (in the same sense that
different argument lists can be overloaded into identically-named
methods in
C++).
An example may help make it clear. Consider the following OSC path:
/daw/cursor/set_position
This would be a command to set a cursor position. If the supplied
argument
were a float32, the unit would be assumed to be seconds. If it were a
string, a broken-down time representation ("HH:MM:SS") would be
assumed, and
so on.
While I can find nothing in the OSC spec that would specifically
forbid this
sort of behavior, I'd like to be sure that, as a practical matter, the
'real-world' apps that are already out there would be able to deal
with this
sort of construct. Would anyone be aware of reasons why this sort
of layout
would not be a good idea?
Cheers!
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. | Chief
Developer |
| | Paravel
Systems |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm
doing. |
| -- Werner von
Braun |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev