IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Will cwb_hooks break?
shakey_snake
post Apr 3 2008, 20:49
Post #1





Group: FB2K Moderator
Posts: 4322
Joined: 1-November 06
From: Cincinnati
Member No.: 37036



I just noticed this thread, but not being a dev I didn't want to respond to it directly.

But, besides the question in the title, will other components break?


--------------------
elevatorladylevitateme
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zao
post Apr 3 2008, 21:11
Post #2





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 899
Joined: 25-September 03
From: Umeċ, Sweden
Member No.: 9001



I know one of mine will, but it was not publicly released anyway so only a few people will be unhappy.


--------------------
Zao shang yong zao nong zao rang zao ren zao.
To, early in the morning, use a chisel to build a bathtub makes impatient people hot-tempered.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
foosion
post Apr 3 2008, 21:23
Post #3





Group: FB2K Moderator (Donating)
Posts: 4414
Joined: 24-February 03
Member No.: 5153



The functions and fields provided by components like foo_cwb_hooks, foo_etc, foo_func and similar will indeed no longer work in title formatting scripts, unless the component that evaluates the title formatting script adds support for the metadb_display_hook API. Besides the official components this will include components that are no longer maintained like foo_ui_panels.

Clarification: This will happen when support for the metadb_display_hook API is removed in the core, which so far won't be in 0.9.5.2 yet.

This post has been edited by foosion: Apr 3 2008, 21:33


--------------------
http://foosion.foobar2000.org/ - my components for foobar2000
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
odyssey
post Apr 3 2008, 21:52
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 2296
Joined: 18-May 03
From: Denmark
Member No.: 6695



Boy, what a surprise...

With the appearent urge for customizability, I can't help but wonder why no developer (or even a decent user) has come up with a proposal for a display component that will satisfy the foobar devs.


--------------------
Can't wait for a HD-AAC encoder :P
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Canar
post Apr 4 2008, 01:12
Post #5





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3348
Joined: 26-July 02
From: princegeorge.ca
Member No.: 2796



foobar2000 is not about customizability. It is very extensible and powerful, and often those two are taken to imply customizability. However, people who have been paying attention to recent development should realize that there's a clear trend towards simplicity at the cost of customizability. None of the extensibility is lost, but many features that allow in-depth customization have been cut in favour of simplicity.

Here we see a minor loss in extensibility, but there's nothing from preventing some other developer from creating an extension to replace this functionality, although it'll probably require some modifications to old components anyhow.

This post has been edited by Canar: Apr 4 2008, 01:17


--------------------
You cannot ABX the rustling of jimmies.
No mouse? No problem.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Squeller
post Apr 4 2008, 05:24
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 2351
Joined: 28-August 02
Member No.: 3218



QUOTE (foosion @ Apr 3 2008, 22:23) *
Clarification: This will happen when support for the metadb_display_hook API is removed in the core, which so far won't be in 0.9.5.2 yet.
But it's the component breaking sword of Damocles again. No idea if cwb_hooks would get updated soon, I was under the impression it's development has at least slowed down... but definitely not PanelsUI. Which is in use very often maybe not as the default UI, but definitely because there's no alternative for track display panel.

This post has been edited by Squeller: Apr 4 2008, 05:29
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
q-stankovic
post Apr 4 2008, 14:18
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 1740
Joined: 28-May 06
From: Düsseldorf
Member No.: 31251



QUOTE (foosion @ Apr 3 2008, 21:23) *
The functions and fields provided by components like foo_cwb_hooks, foo_etc, foo_func and similar will indeed no longer work in title formatting scripts, unless the component that evaluates the title formatting script adds support for the metadb_display_hook API.


There is one point i don't understand: the fields will work if support for new API is added. That's how i understood the explanation in development forum. What's about the functions? It will be then impossible to add some (like $cwb_datediff)?


--------------------
german support forum: www.foobar-users.de / user: qwert73
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
antar3s
post Apr 4 2008, 14:44
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 10-June 06
Member No.: 31713



QUOTE (foosion @ Apr 3 2008, 21:23) *
Clarification: This will happen when support for the metadb_display_hook API is removed in the core, which so far won't be in 0.9.5.2 yet.

This sure is going to be a sad day for many foobar users!!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
anza
post Apr 4 2008, 16:31
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 1317
Joined: 4-January 03
From: Finland
Member No.: 4418



QUOTE (antar3s @ Apr 4 2008, 15:44) *
QUOTE (foosion @ Apr 3 2008, 21:23) *

Clarification: This will happen when support for the metadb_display_hook API is removed in the core, which so far won't be in 0.9.5.2 yet.

This sure is going to be a sad day for many foobar users!!

The day it was originally released was a sad day for many foobar users ph34r.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Keikonium
post Apr 4 2008, 19:23
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 653
Joined: 1-May 06
From: Canada
Member No.: 30281



The way I see it is if you don't like that changes (and from what I've read, that will include me) then don't upgrade to the newest version. I'm sure foobar will lose plenty of users because of the changes that are being made, but I'm sure they will gain a few too.

If these changes do indeed happen, and cwb_hooks, panels_ui, foo_func, and foo_etc will no longer work, then I wont be upgrading unless a successor comes along that can do what they used to. I have exactly what I need in an audio player right now, and the components and extras are just the icing on the cake for me. Thats just my opinion smile.gif.


--------------------
Song List: keikoniumboards.ke.funpic.org/files/songlist.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
shakey_snake
post Apr 4 2008, 19:26
Post #11





Group: FB2K Moderator
Posts: 4322
Joined: 1-November 06
From: Cincinnati
Member No.: 37036



QUOTE (foosion @ Apr 3 2008, 16:23) *
The functions and fields provided by components like foo_cwb_hooks, foo_etc, foo_func and similar will indeed no longer work in title formatting scripts, unless the component that evaluates the title formatting script adds support for the metadb_display_hook API. Besides the official components this will include components that are no longer maintained like foo_ui_panels.

Clarification: This will happen when support for the metadb_display_hook API is removed in the core, which so far won't be in 0.9.5.2 yet.

Thanks for the clarification.
Removal of such a widely used API might be cause for a bump in the major version number, might it not?
I don't think there are many forum poster/users from the 0.9.0 days remaining, (I wasn't around then) but 0.9 broke everything.


I imagine this thread can be closed now, before it develops into the same pointless argument we've seen around here many times before. Peter develops foobar as he thinks is best. discussions about guesstimated user groups is ultimately as pointless as it is fruitless, since for better or worse, user's "wants" typically aren't considered.


--------------------
elevatorladylevitateme
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
foosion
post Apr 4 2008, 19:29
Post #12





Group: FB2K Moderator (Donating)
Posts: 4414
Joined: 24-February 03
Member No.: 5153



Moderation: I've split some off-topic posts that make false assumptions about the reasons for abandoning the metadb_display_hook API.


--------------------
http://foosion.foobar2000.org/ - my components for foobar2000
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Walterrrr
post Apr 5 2008, 01:28
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 94
Joined: 30-November 05
Member No.: 26111



QUOTE (shakey_snake @ Apr 4 2008, 11:26) *
Removal of such a widely used API might be cause for a bump in the major version number, might it not?
I don't think there are many forum poster/users from the 0.9.0 days remaining, (I wasn't around then) but 0.9 broke everything.

if not a minor version number. every time I see a new version come out, even if it's a sub minor, I get excited for the time when 1.0 will arrive and angels will descend from the heavens hearalding the arrival of paradise on Earth.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thuan
post Apr 5 2008, 13:52
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 964
Joined: 10-June 06
Member No.: 31716



In light of this, development of graphical browser has stopped. But he said he will consider making an equivalent component but doesn't rely on title formatting language for scripting.

Also, it's likely this component will still work with new foobar version without metadb_display_hook. As this component doesn't use this API as he said in an email with me.

Well, the only other component that will affect me is cwb_hooks. I use its playback queue fields and its datediff function. Datediff can be accommodated with more scripting with title formatting language anyway, which I find ironic.

[speculation]
From the start, I guess functions in title formatting were for customizing the old default user interface and masstagger script. Because of this, this language is strong enough for certain level of scripting. This development however ends up making users use it in an unintended way now. I'm thinking that if the new default user interface, quick tag, file operations and new properties dialog were there from the start then foobar title formatting language should only have fields and NO function. The new properties dialog and file operations components would need some changes though, to satisfy some cases where the use of current title formatting language functions. Of course, 3rd party developers are free to make components which use a suitable language for scripting. I wouldn't mind a foobar 1.0 like that. foobar this way won't be branded as a geek program anymore for sure and still offer its extensibility that many users like it to be.
[/speculation]

This post has been edited by thuan: Apr 5 2008, 14:16
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halabund
post Apr 5 2008, 20:56
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 202
Joined: 17-February 07
Member No.: 40705



So no more titleformatting functions from third-party components ... ? I don't care about fancy formatting at all, but I'm really going to miss $cwb_removethe, which I used for sorting ... I also use $cwb_datediff for displaying how long since a track has been played, but that's not so important for me.

Is there going to be some replacement for any of the functionality of these two functions?

This post has been edited by halabund: Apr 5 2008, 21:00
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
foosion
post Apr 5 2008, 21:44
Post #16





Group: FB2K Moderator (Donating)
Posts: 4414
Joined: 24-February 03
Member No.: 5153



QUOTE (halabund @ Apr 5 2008, 20:56) *
I don't care about fancy formatting at all, but I'm really going to miss $cwb_removethe, which I used for sorting ...
Facets has an option for that, and so does the "Sort by Fields..." command in foo_utils (which sorts the playlist and is independent of the chosen UI). A centralized sorting facility which includes this ability is on the todo list.


--------------------
http://foosion.foobar2000.org/ - my components for foobar2000
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Xezzy
post Apr 12 2008, 11:42
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 209
Joined: 14-February 08
Member No.: 51306



And I will miss %cwb_systemtime% for my %added% field o.0
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
VeaaC
post Apr 12 2008, 12:31
Post #18





Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 10-December 06
Member No.: 38550



You don't have to miss them, only extra functions are going to break.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st July 2014 - 01:12