This is how Insert, Insert Next, and Insert last function

[dunno]

If you originally created a playlist using Insert, has tracks 1 2 3 and is now playing 2,

you then add additional tracks using the following method
Insert A ->        1 2 3 A    
Insert Next B ->1 2 B 3 A
Insert C ->        1 2 B 3 A C
Insert last D ->  1 2 B 3 A C D
Insert E ->         1 2 B 3 A C E D

just a trivial post to try and illustrate playlist menu functions..

[Llorean]

The Insert C step should result in 12BC3A. "Insert" should always go immedialy after the most recently inserted song, when things are working right, while Insert Next should go immediatly after the currently playing song.

[dunno]

The Insert C step should result in 12BC3A. "Insert" should always go immedialy after the most recently inserted song, when things are working right, while Insert Next should go immediatly after the currently playing song.

nope, thats not how it currently works,

[hardeep]

The Insert C step should result in 12BC3A. "Insert" should always go immedialy after the most recently inserted song, when things are working right, while Insert Next should go immediatly after the currently playing song.

Actually, this is not correct.  We only remember the position where the last track was added using "Insert", not "Insert Next" or "Insert Last".  The idea behind this is that "Insert Next" is really a special case where the user wants to hear a track immediately.  It doesn't necessarily mean that they want all future inserted tracks to be played immediately as well.  Of course, this is relatively easy to change if users prefer the method you describe.

-Hardeep

[Llorean]

Hm, I swear it used to work that way.

So, if I were on song 2 of 1 2 3 4, and I wanted to create 1 2 A B 3 4, I would have to "Insert Next" B, then A? That is my only option for creating that playlist unless I removed 3 and 4 first? It seems limited now... At least in my mind it's counterintuitive to force a user to insert in inverse order.

[dunno]

to me, current behaviour of "Insert" is intuitive.

[Febs]

I agree with Llorean.  If "insert next" does not move the pointer, there is no way to insert a track immediately following the tracking that is being inserted.  This limits what you can do with "insert."  If it were changed so that "insert next" moves the pointer, you could still create exactly the same playlist that Dunno used in his example:

Track 2 is being played.  You then add additional tracks using the following method
Insert A ->        1 2 3 A    
Insert Next B ->1 2 B 3 A
Insert LAST C ->        1 2 B 3 A C
Insert last D ->  1 2 B 3 A C D
Insert E ->         1 2 B 3 A C E D

On the other hand, if "insert next" does not move the pointer, there is no way to go from

1 2 B 3 A

to

1 2 B C 3 A

[dunno]

On the other hand, if "insert next" does not move the pointer, there is no way to go from

1 2 B 3 A

to

1 2 B C 3 A

yes there is, use "Move".

its a question of which behaviour is more intuitive, yours or current.

[hardeep]

So, if I were on song 2 of 1 2 3 4, and I wanted to create 1 2 A B 3 4, I would have to "Insert Next" B, then A? That is my only option for creating that playlist unless I removed 3 and 4 first? It seems limited now... At least in my mind it's counterintuitive to force a user to insert in inverse order.

If you inserted tracks 1-4 individually into your dynamic playlist then, yes, you would need to do as your described.  However, if you started with a playlist or directory that contained tracks 1-4 then "Insert" would work exactly as you expect.

The original dynamic playlist design revolved around adding tracks to an existing m3u or directory.  Let's say we have a directory with tracks 1-4 and are currently playing track 2, what would be more intuitive to you:

Insert A -> 1 2 A 3 4  
Insert B -> 1 2 A B 3 4
Insert C -> 1 2 A B C 3 4
Insert Next D -> 1 2 D A B C 3 4
Insert E -> 1 2 D A B C E 3 4

OR

Insert A -> 1 2 A 3 4
Insert B -> 1 2 A B 3 4
Insert C -> 1 2 A B C 3 4
Insert Next D -> 1 2 D A B C 3 4
Insert E -> 1 2 D E A B C 3 4

Personally I prefer the first but am open to changing to the second if that's what the majority prefers.  For that matter, I may be in the minority of users who starts with a base m3u for my dynamic playlist.

-Hardeep

[Llorean]

I can't really think of ever wanting to use the first case, though I'll admit it's possible.

It also seems to me that the behaviour shouldn't be different (for insertion) depending on whether a playlist is Dynamic or Static.

I mean, if I choose to "Insert" a folder, why should it behave any different than if I play a song in that folder with Shuffle enabled, and play selected song disabled?

[hardeep]

I can't really think of ever wanting to use the first case, though I'll admit it's possible.

I use this a lot when in a radio and/or party type situation.  I have a base playlist that I start with and allow anyone to insert tracks as they please, played in the order inserted.  Every now and then there's a need/request to play a particular track immediately which is when insert next is used.

It also seems to me that the behaviour shouldn't be different (for insertion) depending on whether a playlist is Dynamic or Static.

I mean, if I choose to "Insert" a folder, why should it behave any different than if I play a song in that folder with Shuffle enabled, and play selected song disabled?

I actually fixed this recently, inserting a directory vs. playing a track in it should behave exactly the same way in regards to playlist commands.  The only time the behaviour is different is when you create a dynamic playlist with a single track and then begin inserting more into it.

One other idea I had was to add a "Reset Insert Position" option to the playlist menu.  This may give us the best of both worlds at the expense of another option.

-Hardeep

[Znirk]

Okaaaayyy. I had read the manual topic and wondered what the difference between "insert" and "insert last" was.

So, would I be right to put it like this?

A currently running playlist has three sections: first its original contents from the file, then the tracks added with "insert" in the order they were added, finally the tracks added with "insert last" in the order they were added. All three sections can have further tracks "inserted next" while they're playing.

If that's right, what happens if you're already in the "insert last" section when you "insert" a track? Does that track go to the "insert" section (before the Now Playing position in the playlist) and only get played if you repeat the playlist, or does "insert" do the same as "insert last" in this special case?

(Oh, and Hardeep: What would your "reset insert position" option set the position to?)

[hardeep]

A currently running playlist has three sections: first its original contents from the file, then the tracks added with "insert" in the order they were added, finally the tracks added with "insert last" in the order they were added. All three sections can have further tracks "inserted next" while they're playing.

Thinking of this in terms of sections makes it more confusing imo.  "Insert Last" always inserts at the end of the playlist.  "Insert Next" always inserts immediately after the current playing track.  "Insert" works like the Winamp queue function, playing tracks in the order inserted.

(Oh, and Hardeep: What would your "reset insert position" option set the position to?)

It would be just like the first time you insert, the track will be added immediately after the current playing track.

-Hardeep

[Llorean]

I think there *always* needs to be an easy way to build a Queue after the currently playing song. For example, if the playlists is 1 2 3 4, independent of what other insertion options I've done, if Now Playing is 2, I should always be able to create 1 2 A B C 3 4 without having to insert in reverse order. Of course, if one moves the insertion position with insert last then it's reasonable that going back would result in 1 2 X Y Z A B C 3 4 or something similar, but it seems to me that there should always be a way to insert songs, in order, after the currently playing one. At least to me.

If I'm alone in this, it's fine, but this seems like the most common style of insertion procedure I use, lining up several songs I've just decided I wanted to hear, and I don't feel it should be dependent upon me not having created the initial playlist by way of insertions.

[hardeep]

If I'm alone in this, it's fine, but this seems like the most common style of insertion procedure I use, lining up several songs I've just decided I wanted to hear, and I don't feel it should be dependent upon me not having created the initial playlist by way of insertions.

For the most part, that's how I insert tracks as well.  Unfortunately, there is no easy way to determine when the initial playlist creation is complete.  Do we want to use "Insert Next" as a trigger for this or add a separate command?  Another alternative would be to allow users to create a playlist before beginning playback (http://www.rockbox.org/tracker/task/1856).

-Hardeep