Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Element Green
Indeed. Probably the easiest would be to just lift the related bits from glib itself. Best regards, Element On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > May I try? :D > > Pretty much everything outside of threading is really trivial. The wiki > says the supported platforms are Win

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Ryan Gonzalez
May I try? :D Pretty much everything outside of threading is really trivial. The wiki says the supported platforms are Windows, OSX, and Linux, and that it runs under Solaris and OS/2 but they aren't officially supported. For atomics, glib seems to use GCC's C++11-style atomics. when it can, then

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Element Green
I think the ticket system on SourceForge would be the best way to submit this: https://sourceforge.net/p/fluidsynth/tickets/ Indeed, there isn't a lot of stuff that needs to be implemented to remove glib as a dependency, for a single platform/architecture. Doing this in a clean and portable fashi

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Johannes Schickel
On 01/13/2016 09:28 PM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: Similar things for the rest of them. This doesn't seem TOO bad... Sure, nothing there is magic. But I am not sure if you want to implement and maintain it own your own. Looks like supported systems in 1.0.9 were: Win32, OS/2, Mac OS 9, and POSIX

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Ryan Gonzalez
Well, the majority of g_* are wrapped with macros anyway, so it wouldn't be a major issue. Would the developers of Fluidsynth be OK if I sent a series of patches to this list that slowly eliminated the need for glib? Unless you have another way of handling contributions or something On Wed, J

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Kjetil Matheussen
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:28 PM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > > Similar things for the rest of them. This doesn't seem TOO bad... > > Maybe it would be a good idea to just implement the necessary "g_"* functions for the needed platforms instead of creating a new API doing all of these things? _

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Ryan Gonzalez
This is a list of all the glib functions/macros Fluidsynth uses: g_assert g_atomic_int_add g_atomic_int_compare_and_exchange g_atomic_int_dec_and_test g_atomic_int_exchange_and_add g_atomic_int_get g_atomic_int_inc g_atomic_int_set g_atomic_pointer_compare_and_exchange g_atomic_pointer_get g_atomi

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Johannes Schickel
Hi Element, don't worry, I see the point of using glib from your side. :-) You seem to be right about the hash table code. It looks like it only mentions "g_hashtable" in some comments, I appareantly missed that when giving this a quick grep run earlier. Ooops :-). I was looking a bit into t

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread jean-jacques.ceresa
Le 13/01/2016 18:36, Element Green a écrit : Having said all that, it would be nice to have the ability to build a possibly stripped down version of FluidSynth which would utilize a user defined compatibility layer. ...Internally the FluidSynth source code still has it's own compatibility

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Ryan Gonzalez
On January 13, 2016 11:33:20 AM CST, Chris Robinson wrote: >On 01/13/2016 08:47 AM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: >> glib isn't actually that huge, and Fluidsynth puts it to good use. >> Cross-platform threading is hard. I'm writing an application that >> depends on Fluidsynth, and it wasn't really a pr

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Fastmail
A single thread version would be great for embedded applications! Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 13, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Element Green > wrote: > > Hello Johannes, > > Seeing as I'm the one responsible for converting FluidSynth over to glib in > the first place, I thought it is only right that I

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Element Green
Hello Johannes, Seeing as I'm the one responsible for converting FluidSynth over to glib in the first place, I thought it is only right that I respond ;-) Prior to FluidSynth depending on glib, there was a bit of platform support code. This code was error prone, somewhat hard to maintain, and of

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Chris Robinson
On 01/13/2016 08:47 AM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote: glib isn't actually that huge, and Fluidsynth puts it to good use. Cross-platform threading is hard. I'm writing an application that depends on Fluidsynth, and it wasn't really a program. It's not too difficult to wrap up pthreads and Win32 threads i

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Ryan Gonzalez
glib isn't actually that huge, and Fluidsynth puts it to good use. Cross-platform threading is hard. I'm writing an application that depends on Fluidsynth, and it wasn't really a program. The synthesizer indirectly uses gthreads a lot, so I don't think it would be easy to remove. But, do older

[fluid-dev] FluidSynth and glib

2016-01-13 Thread Johannes Schickel
Hello, first of all thank you for your awesome project! I am a member of ScummVM (http://www.scummvm.org) and I am currently looking into getting our FluidSynth support a bit more up to speed (i.e. get it into more of our ports, updating to the latest version, etc). It looks like there are so