Support and General Use > User Interface and Voice
Pressing LEFT to get to WPS from file root
Llorean:
You forget the "Not wasting binary size" camp.
*All* the feature does is adds an additional button to do something that can already be done from that screen. I can't imagine justifying increasing the binary size for that, evne as toggleable. Consider that they wouldn't even justify the binary size incrase for a choice between % and dB volume in the status bar after they changed.
goffa:
I understand keeping rockbox trim and lean. However, i find a feature such as left to wps, or the instant queuing quite useful. There are a great number of features that i will never use included in rockbox already. Yes, it is true that you can click 3 times every time you want to add a song instead of one, just doesn't seem... efficient.
Do i think that they should be removed? Absolutely not. Example. I can't stand crossfade, there is much more code involved with crossfade than with these two minor patches (minor in size, not functionality). However, i do know that many people utilize this feature, just like i know that many people would use left to wps and the instant queuing. The patches are out, they work, they aren't huge.
This player would cease to function if we removed everything that someone didn't find useful.
I wouldn't use the % and dB toggle myself, but i'm not opposed to that either. There has to be a balance between functionality and trim code.
I only suggest a toggle as a compromise. My TRUE feeling is that one click queuing should be a default action. I know that that is a MUCH tougher sell than the toggle. (Maybe i don't KNOW that, but i assume that.) Plus, you get arguments from people who like it the way it is. You get the common "why should everyone change for you" debate, which i was hoping to avoid. Instead, i constantly run into the keep code clean at the cost of function argument. Catch 22 i guess.
In the end, i think it's funny to argue about binary size when there are talking menus built into that same binary. Yet, we can't include another menu option because that would bloat the code. Kind of takes the logic out of the "not wasting binary size" camp if you ask me. I guess the ones in that camp are the ones that ultimately decide the direction rockbox goes. In all actuality, i guess its their right, they built the player so they can include as much or as little as they want.
In the end of the day, i think the player should mold to you, not the other way around.
Yotto:
I won't take up any of your points, because in spirit I agree with them (Especially about crossfade. Yuck) but as to the talking menus, Rockbox has a fairly large (compared to other MP3 firmwares) blind user base. If you remove the speech support, you essentially brick their players.
goffa:
I was merely using voice as an example. Stating that the voice feature is huge in size. I don't think it should be removed just because i don't use it.
But, by the same token its hard to preach "small binary size" when the above 2 mentioned features (left to wps, click action) don't really hinder performance or comparatively increase binary size.
I also understand that mountains are made of single grains of dirt. Meaning that you cant include EVERYTHING. By the same token, I think we can add a lot of "single grains of dirt" before we reach mountain sized proportions or even start to affect performance.
P.S. If i had my way, voice would be a compile time option (like a yes to include /no to exclude). I realize that implementing that would require a lot of unnecessary work. So, I'm suggesting that the developers don't waste their time/energy on that. Since, because it is a menu option, i can disable the feature and not affect performance. The only difference is binary size, so the effort is not really worth the gain.
Llorean:
The problem is, we're *already* at mountain size, as many of you seem to forget.
It is official that the Rockbox binary is too big (it won't fit in the space constrained areas that we were trying to avoid making it too big for) so now we need to DECREASE it's size, but neatening up code and such.
And unfortunately you picked the wrong feature of the two to defend. I'm in favour of one-button queue and actually stated my suggestion that it be the default action for a short tap of Rec while in WPS.
My last post was ONLY against left-to-wps because that can ALREADY be done with a SINGLE button press from the very same screen you'd press left to get to WPS. I'm sorry if you have to move your thumb 3/4 inches more, but I think not wasting binary size is worth that small of an inconvenience when the binary is already too big, and that is definitely a grain of sand our mountain can live without.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version