Hi Clemens,
On 12/08/16 12:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote:
On 12/08/16 08:10, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
Felipe F. Tonello wrote:
- case 0xf4:
- case 0xf5:
return 0; /* ignore */- case 0xf7:
return 0; /* ignore */Silent data loss is bad.
What do you mean by that?
When you want to send the byte F5, this code will silently drop it.
I see your point, you are right. Although, as we know, the underlying driver won't send this byte anyway, but that is not for the application to decide.
- case 0x00 ... 0x7f:
return rstate_len ?: rstate_len - 1;rstate_len - 1 == -1
?
That's why there is this condition, if rstate_len is zero, than it returns 0.
There is not need to use rstate_len when its value is already known and does not affect the computation; it could just be written as:
return rstate_len ?: -1;
Right, that was not the original intent, so this code was actually wrong. But I will remove it anyway based on your comment below.
The most robust way to find message boundaries probably would be a state machine. However, there is actually no requirement to find all message boundaries; the _actual_ requirement is to insert pauses between SysEx messages. So don't bother to try to parse everything; just search for F0 or F7.
Well, I tough it would be useful to work in any type of MIDI message not just SysEx.
But there is no _actual_ use case, where somebody actually needed it. And as shown by all those problems, handling all types of messages makes the code too complex.
True. So I will make sure to add this to the documentation.