3 Jul
2011
3 Jul
'11
6:32 p.m.
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org> wrote:
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 08:10:09AM -0400, Paul Davis
wrote:
sure, which right now is not a separate function at all, but merely a
branch of the "finish" function. not exactly a huge amount of work to
split it out, but indicative of the complete (and understandable)
design assumption "there's no way to get here except via the GUI".
otoh, you're right, in the sense that quit-WITH-save is even more
complex, and faces all the same issues with threading etc, only more
so because it actually has data to save etc. etc.
the lack of quit-without-save is a decision that
i was opposed to, but
accepted precisely because it has the potential to interfere with
developer's internal architecture. most applications these days ask if
you attempt to quit without saving (some will even treat the window
manager close button as a trigger for this). quit-without-save
(potentially) requires a new code path that circumvents whatever
internal logic the program has to decide whether to ask the user.
It requires nothing new, just calling the existing code that is linked
to the 'Just Quit' button (using Ardour as an example).