Connection status issue #2519 #2550

pgScorpio · 2022-03-25T21:49:47Z

In the first stage I just renamed some functions in CClient to make the problem clear.
The second stage should already solve this issue.

Short description of changes

First Stage: Make the cause of the problem clear.

Second Stage:
Moved Connect/Disconnect code from CClientdlg to CClient.
Now using the proper connected checks in several places.
Added bDisconnectAndDisable to CChannel. (For a Client now
Channel.Disconnect() will block audio data and auto disable the channel on disconnected)

CHANGELOG:
Fix for issue #2519

Context: Fixes an issue?

fixes issue #2519

Does this change need documentation? What needs to be documented and how?

No documentation changes.

Status of this Pull Request

What is missing until this pull request can be merged?

Checklist

[x ] I've verified that this Pull Request follows the general code principles
[x ] I tested my code and it does what I want
[x ] My code follows the style guide
[x ] I waited some time after this Pull Request was opened and all GitHub checks completed without errors.
[x ] I've filled all the content above

pljones · 2022-03-25T22:08:16Z

src/client.h

-    void Stop();
-    bool IsRunning() { return Sound.IsRunning(); }
-    bool IsCallbackEntered() const { return Sound.IsCallbackEntered(); }
+    void StartConnection(); // ---> pgScorpio: Was Start(), but Start what ? ( Should be Connect() ?)


Staart the client. It does more than just connection.

pljones · 2022-03-25T22:08:31Z

src/client.h

-    bool IsRunning() { return Sound.IsRunning(); }
-    bool IsCallbackEntered() const { return Sound.IsCallbackEntered(); }
+    void StartConnection(); // ---> pgScorpio: Was Start(), but Start what ? ( Should be Connect() ?)
+    void StopConnection();  // ---> pgScorpio: Was Stop(), but Stop what ?   ( Should be Disconnect() ?)


Stop the client. It does more than just disconnection.

pljones · 2022-03-25T22:11:25Z

src/clientdlg.cpp

    // set address and check if address is valid
    if ( pClient->SetServerAddr ( strSelectedAddress ) )
    {
        // try to start client, if error occurred, do not go in
        // running state but show error message
        try
        {
-            if ( !pClient->IsRunning() )
+            if ( !pClient->SoundIsStarted() ) // ---> pgScorpio: Again this is NOT connection started !() )


No, it's whether the client is running.

Exactly what I mean to say! This function does NOT indicate if we are connected to a server, but on;ly if Sound is Started.
And Sound started does say nothing about an connection to the server, since Sound.Start() can have failed (No check on that) but the connection still can be started with Channel.Enable(true) !
This is exactly where it goes wrong with an invalid device selected...
Sound is NOT started, but the Channel is enabled !

It's meant to indicate whether the client has started. Not the state of the sound system. Not the state of the network connection. But whether the client has started.

It's meant to indicate whether the client has started. Not the state of the sound system. Not the state of the network connection. But whether the client has started.

I Think we mean the same, but use different vocabulary ;=))
And yes, I am very persistent in using variable- and function names that clearly state what they do (And unfortunately I encounter a lot of them in jamulus which absolutely don't, some of them even very misleading.)

So I think the Client is already started when you run jamulus (without a -s ;=))

It's about if the connection to the server is started, and the original IsRunning() (Used at many places) had nothing to do with the connection to the server, but with Sound. So if Sound.Start() fails (and there is no check on that!) they all think there is no connection to the server, but in reality we actually are connected/connecting to the server, so UI and reality don't match and you can't disconnect, since hitting the connect button will try to start a connection again while we are already connecting.

No, the Client is definitely not started when you run Jamulus. It's not even created then.

No, the Client is definitely not started when you run Jamulus. It's not even created then.

I meant It is started automatically when you run jamulus (without a -s ;=)). (Created in main and started with pApp->exec();)

As said we are apparently using different vocabulary...
Maybe you call " Started" what I call "Connected" (or "connecting" ?), since I think the client is already started if you see it's user interface and can interact with it. Though it's just not yet connected to a server, it's still "Running" in some way.

Simple verbs like " Start" and " Stop" are often ambiguous, and adverbs like " Running" and " Connected" are often even more ambiguous and often interpreted differently depending on the context.
i.e. When are you "Driving" a car ?, As soon as you take a seat behind the wheel? (Legally seen yes), When you "Started" the engine? (You can drive downhill without even starting the engine), or when your car is really moving ? (If so, also when it's on the back of a truck?, or being towed?)

So to come back on topic: " Started" does not mean "Running", nor "Connected". And not "Connected" is not the same as not "Running" (might be "Connecting", so " Started" but not yet " Connected" ). An easy confusion that can cause a lot of, often hard to find, bugs, like in this case.

But no offence, I'm the last one to say that writing clear code is easy. Even after so many years I'm still struggling almost daily with good, clear, naming's.

Don’t quote me on that – since my knowledge of the code is basic – but I think "the client" is not the UI but the CClient class. Maybe talking about the actual class names makes it easier to avoid confusion.

Also: I wouldn’t write your name next to comments since they might be updated/… in future by someone else who isn’t you. Having you in the git history should clearly show who wrote what if this is actually needed.

@ann0see

Don’t quote me on that – since my knowledge of the code is basic – but I think "the client" is not the UI but the CClient class. Maybe talking about the actual class names makes it easier to avoid confusion.

I agree, so to be clearer then: I said "I think the client is already started if you see it's user interface and can interact with it..." where "the client" is CClient and "it's user interface" is CCLientDlg. And in my opinion CClient must be running when you can interact with it via CClientDlg, since it's CClient which actually changes the settings and controls the connection to the server.

Also: I wouldn’t write your name next to comments since they might be updated/… in future by someone else who isn’t you. Having you in the git history should clearly show who wrote what if this is actually needed.

Good to know... Thanks for the advise.

pgScorpio · 2022-03-26T01:35:32Z

And auto-build failed on Android, Linux, macOS and iOS ?
I should have to look into this, but that's exactly why I want the Sound-redesign !
Nothing changed in any CSound, but still build errors on other OS builds ??? This should never happen...

pgScorpio · 2022-03-26T01:46:35Z

And again the code style check failed, while I have ran make clang_format and again the result of the auto-build clang-format is NOT according the code style!

I'm really considering stopping my contribution to jamulus at all. Too much frustration!

ann0see · 2022-03-26T06:56:17Z

Maybe leave the clang format alone until it’s close to finished?

ann0see · 2022-03-26T06:59:53Z

I'm really considering stopping my contribution to jamulus at all. Too much frustration!

If nobody notices and reports the Problems they can’t be fixed, so yes, it’s painful to start but has a high value.

Did you see the error? Cross platform development is probably really hard.

pgScorpio · 2022-03-26T22:01:23Z

@ann0see

Did you see the error? Cross platform development is probably really hard.

Now I do see it! Thanks!. Somehow missed that one in the search and replace :=((,
I Should have tested it on at least on macOS and Linux (and also headless, which isn't even in the Qt Creator builds, so I had to add it), but it is corrected now.

And Cross platform development Isn't that hard with the propper design and tooling. I've done it for many years, And as a matter of fact it always has been one of my specialties, but unfortunately Qt has little to no support for it and Jamulus is also not really well designed for multi platform either (it clearly has a history), hence my redesign proposal, but It will take a while till we are getting there. As I see it Sound is just the first, most obvious, step....

ann0see · 2022-03-29T13:12:34Z

src/global.h

+#define CMDLN_CTRLMIDICH          "--ctrlmidich",          "--ctrlmidich"
+// Backwards compatibilyty:
+#define CMDLN_CENTRALSERVER       "--centralserver",       "--centralserver"
+// pgScorpio: TODO These are NOT in help !:


I remember that they are mostly used for debugging/advanced use. Hence it was agreed not to document them.

@ann0see

But these options are documented on the wiki and the man page

So should I change this comment to "Debug options: (not in help)" ?

Also I think I'm messing things up, since this is a change from issue #2538.
And I only just now realize what you ment with "although merging from your master branch to our master branch is discouraged". I didn't branch this one ! So now, after my rebasing these changes also appeared in my branches i guess?
(Sorry, still learning...)

If "show all servers" and "analszer console" are really documented somewhere, something I wasn’t aware of changed (@gilgongo do you know anything?).

If you rebase your master branch, sure this will show up in the PR from master (but shouldn’t on this one).

My offer still stands: we can have a short call if you need it).

Yes, the use of "show all servers" is mentioned as a way of debugging a problem. But "analyzerconsole" got added to the man page, because... the man page plays by its own rules.

ann0see

Can't comment much on the code - that should be up to @softins and @pljones but see some comments. How mergable is this PR at the moment?

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:17:39Z

src/channel.h

@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ class CChannel : public QObject

    void PrepAndSendPacket ( CHighPrioSocket* pSocket, const CVector<uint8_t>& vecbyNPacket, const int iNPacketLen );

-    void ResetTimeOutCounter() { iConTimeOut = iConTimeOutStartVal; }
+    void ResetTimeOutCounter() { iConTimeOut = bDisconnectAndDisable ? 1 : iConTimeOutStartVal; }


How often do we use short hand if in the source?

How often do we use short hand if in the source?

You mean conditional assignment ?
It is used at several places.
I use it whenever it makes the code more readable... (at least to me ;=))

I use it whenever it makes the code more readable

I usually think it makes code less readable ;-). But in this case I think it's ok - but that depends on if this is used elsewhere too.

Where's it's a simple "truth" test to pick between two values based on another value, it's okay, in general, I'd say. (I don't think Volker was keen on it.) Anything else (e.g. an expression getting evaluated as any part of the ?: expression).

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:18:34Z

src/client.cpp

+{
+    if ( Channel.IsEnabled() )
+    {
+        /*


Why is this commented? Could you please remove debug code - if we want to merge this?

@ann0see

Why is this commented? Could you please remove debug code - if we want to merge this?

What do you mean exactly ?
Most of the comment was already there, I adjusted to the new situation, but I see there is still some comment from stage 1, no longer applicable for stage 2
I will remove those.
And what "debug" code ? A check on failure of disconnect ? That's essential code to me....

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:19:20Z

src/clientdlg.cpp

@@ -1141,31 +1127,17 @@ void CClientDlg::OnTimerCheckAudioDeviceOk()
    // timeout to check if a valid device is selected and if we do not have
    // fundamental settings errors (in which case the GUI would only show that
    // it is trying to connect the server which does not help to solve the problem (#129))
-    if ( !pClient->IsCallbackEntered() )
+    if ( !pClient->SoundIsRunning() ) // ---> pgScorpio Was pClient->IsCallbackEntered()


Suggested change

if ( !pClient->SoundIsRunning() ) // ---> pgScorpio Was pClient->IsCallbackEntered()

if ( !pClient->SoundIsRunning() ) // Was pClient->IsCallbackEntered()

I don't think we should put naming history into comments at all. That'll be rather something for the git history, IMO?

I don't think we should put naming history into comments at all. That'll be rather something for the git history, IMO?

ann0see already pointed me to that on. I will remove those.

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:20:05Z

src/clientdlg.cpp

-// TODO is this still required???
-// immediately update status bar
-OnTimerStatus();


Could you please briefly explain your ideas/changes?

Could you please briefly explain your ideas/changes?

I like to use clear function names that are telling what they do...

The next line now calls UpdateSettingsAndChatButtons() which is now also used in OnTimerStatus() and at multiple other locations, instead of calling OnTimerStatus(), or repeating the same code, at multiple locations.

Since the name OnTimerStatus() tells exactly when it's called (Good name for a callback) this suggests that it's used for one thing only and does not give any clue it's used elsewhere too, so future changes to OnTimerStatus() could have unwanted side effects.

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:20:45Z

src/global.h

+//============================================================================
+// CMsgBoxes class:
+//  Use this static class to show basic Error, Warning and Info messageboxes
+//  For own created message boxes you should still use
+//    CMsgBoxes::MainForm() and CMsgBoxes::MainFormName()
+//============================================================================


Is this comment syntax used throughout the code - except for ASIO? We should remain consistent.

Is this comment syntax used throughout the code - except for ASIO? We should remain consistent.

AFAIK it was already used at some places (and also in many libraries), but various other styles are used too (so not very consistent anyway)...

Personally I find this the most readable style, especially when quick scrolling through a file. But maybe that is because this was the mandatory style I had to use for many, many years, so it became a habit ;=)

I can adapt if you want, but forgive me if I frequently fall back into those habits ;=)

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:23:04Z

src/main.cpp

@@ -78,6 +158,7 @@ int main ( int argc, char** argv )
 #else
    bool bIsClient = true;
 #endif
+    bool         bSpecialOptions             = false; // Any options after this option will be accepted ! (mostly used for debugging purpouses)


What's that exactly? Is it a new debugging feature?

What's that exactly? Is it a new debugging feature?

Yes since we now can access the command line parameters anywhere in the code those are also very useful for debugging and testing purposes too. But since there is a check in main which would accept only valid, known parameters I introduced the "--special" option to allow any option for debugging and test purposes.

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:23:32Z

src/main.cpp

@@ -127,14 +208,20 @@ int main ( int argc, char** argv )
    // QT docu: argv()[0] is the program name, argv()[1] is the first
    // argument and argv()[argc()-1] is the last argument.
    // Start with first argument, therefore "i = 1"
+
+    // clang-format off
+// pgScorio TODO:


TODO comments should be avoided (best done) before a merge ;-)

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:24:30Z

src/main.cpp

@@ -148,7 +235,7 @@ int main ( int argc, char** argv )
        // Common options:

        // Initialization file -------------------------------------------------
-        if ( GetStringArgument ( argc, argv, i, "-i", "--inifile", strArgument ) )
+        if ( cmdLine.GetStringArgument ( i, CMDLN_INIFILE, strArgument ) )


cmdLine sounds a bit strange and somewhat not consistent to the style - however, I don't know what the current style would want here.

cmdLine sounds a bit strange and somewhat not consistent to the style - however, I don't know what the current style would want here.

Getting an argument from the Command line.. so cmdLine seams logical to me...
And consistent to what style ? Unfortunately I didn't find a consistent naming style in the code yet...

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:24:57Z

src/main.cpp

-        // JSON-RPC port number ------------------------------------------------
-        if ( GetNumericArgument ( argc, argv, i, "--jsonrpcport", "--jsonrpcport", 0, 65535, rDbleArgument ) )
-        {
-            iJsonRpcPortNumber = static_cast<quint16> ( rDbleArgument );
-            qInfo() << qUtf8Printable ( QString ( "- JSON-RPC port number: %1" ).arg ( iJsonRpcPortNumber ) );
-            CommandLineOptions << "--jsonrpcport";
-            continue;
-        }
-
-        // JSON-RPC secret file name -------------------------------------------
-        if ( GetStringArgument ( argc, argv, i, "--jsonrpcsecretfile", "--jsonrpcsecretfile", strArgument ) )
-        {
-            strJsonRpcSecretFileName = strArgument;
-            qInfo() << qUtf8Printable ( QString ( "- JSON-RPC secret file: %1" ).arg ( strJsonRpcSecretFileName ) );
-            CommandLineOptions << "--jsonrpcsecretfile";
-            continue;
-        }
-


Why did that get removed?

Good point !!
I have no idea how that happened !

ann0see · 2022-04-01T20:27:44Z

src/main.cpp

@@ -556,14 +575,27 @@ int main ( int argc, char** argv )
            continue;
        }

+        // Enable Special Options ----------------------------------------------
+        if ( cmdLine.GetFlagArgument ( i, CMDLN_SPECIAL ) )


After thinking a bit more about the new style: I think it would still be good to see the options in the code like before. But I agree that the current way is not good since it leads to a lot of unneeded code.

Something like a function getting all arguments from the CLI and returning an array of enabled options (or similar) which we loop through to set the options would be another option.

Please explain further...
The code isn't that different from how it was, except for the defines for the short + long names. Is that what you have a problem with ?
Personally I think it makes the code a lot more readable, and it has another reason... since it is no longer necessary to pass command line parameters as variable true a lot of constructors, this could mean the long and short names could spread throughout the code and that didn't seem a good idea to me, so I use defines instead.

And I think there is hardly any more code, it's just in another place.

hoffie · 2022-04-01T20:54:28Z

The PR title suggests that this PR is related to a connection status issue. There are logic adjustments in that area (bDisconnectAndDisable?). At the same time, the PR description says "No actual code changes". This doesn't match up for me. I guess that's where the work started, but it doesn't appropriately describe the changes in this PR, IMO. :)
The PR contains a rework of command line flag processing. I don't think that's related? I think we should get better there, but please keep in mind that @pljones has already been working on some kind of refactoring in that area, IIRC.
The PR contains dialog box refactoring. I don't see how this is related either. I'm not opposed to it at all (but haven't checked more deeply either). I just believe it doesn't belong here.

For my taste, that should be three (or more?) individual PRs, some with explicit Discussions/Issue ahead of time.

pgScorpio · 2022-04-01T23:57:17Z

@hoffie

I completely understand your confusion, but that's because I terribly messed up some things by opening a PR from my master (Sorry!!). This causing PR's, my master updates and branch rebasing to mingle up. (I hope we can still correct this)

The PR title suggests that this PR is related to a connection status issue. There are logic adjustments in that area (bDisconnectAndDisable?). At the same time, the PR description says "No actual code changes". This doesn't match up for me. I guess that's where the work started, but it doesn't appropriately describe the changes in this PR, IMO. :)

"No actual code change" was the " first stage" (Just renaming functions to make the problem clear), in the mean time the second stage is committed too (solving the problem, so actually changing the code). Probably this should have been a new PR? I just don't know...

The PR contains a rework of command line flag processing. I don't think that's related? I think we should get better there, but please keep in mind that @pljones has already been working on some kind of refactoring in that area, IIRC.

The PR contains dialog box refactoring. I don't see how this is related either. I'm not opposed to it at all (but haven't checked more deeply either). I just believe it doesn't belong here.

Yes those are from PR #2541 "Adding global messagebox and commandline parameter parsing classes." that was pushed from my master (Sorry again!!)

For my taste, that should be three (or more?) individual PRs, some with explicit Discussions/Issue ahead of time.

So as a matter of fact it are two PR's, both with multiple commits, and updates of my own master also seem to appear here now, so I understand all is getting really unclear (also for me) and I hope we can find a way to solve this problem.

Probably it's better to solve my git problems first and than completely start over again, since I guess I'm already spending more time in solving all kind of problems then I did spent on the coding this PR itself.

In this first stage I just renamed some functions in CClient to make the problem clear. See "---> pgScorpio:" comments in the problem area's. The next stage will actually change the code to solve this issue.

define the in headless non existing QDialog as void and send messages to the appropriate output stream

Co-Authored-By: pgScorpio <[email protected]>

Moved Connect/Disconnect code from CClientdlg to CClient. Now using the proper connected checks in several places. Added bDisconnectAndDisable to CChannel. (For a Client now Channel.Disconnect() will block audio data and auto disable the channel on disconnected)

define the in headless non existing QDialog as void and send messages to the appropriate output stream

Moved Connect/Disconnect code from CClientdlg to CClient. Now using the proper connected checks in several places. Added bDisconnectAndDisable to CChannel. (For a Client now Channel.Disconnect() will block audio data and auto disable the channel on disconnected)

@pgScorpio

This is a manual port of jamulussoftware#2550 by @pgScorpio Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see · 2024-09-08T09:54:01Z

@pgScorpio I've now opened #3364 Please continue with the other PR.

@pgScorpio

This is a manual port of jamulussoftware#2550 by @pgScorpio Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

@pgScorpio

This is a manual port of jamulussoftware#2550 by @pgScorpio Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

@pgScorpio

This is a manual port of jamulussoftware#2550 by @pgScorpio Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

pgScorpio · 2024-09-08T10:10:21Z

@pgScorpio I've now opened #3364 Please continue with the other PR.

Sorry, but this was years Ago!

In the mean time, due to health issues and other priorities, I totally stopped programming (and even using Jamules).

ann0see · 2024-09-08T10:15:41Z

Ok. No problem. I hope the team will be able to pick up the changes.

ann0see · 2024-09-08T10:16:23Z

Best wishes for your health.

Extracted from: jamulussoftware#2550 Related to: https://github.com/jamulussoftware/jamulus/pull/3364/files/21815c1a0708979fe0414c30e0294feaa7632be3#r1759185427 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

Extracted from: jamulussoftware#2550 Related to: https://github.com/jamulussoftware/jamulus/pull/3364/files/21815c1a0708979fe0414c30e0294feaa7632be3#r1759185427 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

pljones reviewed Mar 25, 2022

View reviewed changes

ann0see mentioned this pull request Mar 26, 2022

Investigate differences in clang format in CI and Windows #2552

Closed

ann0see reviewed Mar 29, 2022

View reviewed changes

ann0see reviewed Apr 1, 2022

View reviewed changes

pgScorpio and others added 17 commits April 4, 2022 16:35

Trying to ignore my vs files

3bb34f4

Connection status issue jamulussoftware#2519 first stage

9aeceb0

In this first stage I just renamed some functions in CClient to make the problem clear. See "---> pgScorpio:" comments in the problem area's. The next stage will actually change the code to solve this issue.

Added CMsgBoxes and CCommanlineOptions to global.h,main.cpp

f9f5e30

Modified messageboxes to use the new CMsgBoxes class

24f59e0

clang-format update (hopefully ok now)

0923cff

Solution for headless build?

03a8782

define the in headless non existing QDialog as void and send messages to the appropriate output stream

clang-format update (hopefully ok now)

b152344

Co-Authored-By: pgScorpio <[email protected]>

Bugfix non Windows exit

1299e73

Added CMsgBoxes and CCommanlineOptions to global.h,main.cpp

a225596

Modified messageboxes to use the new CMsgBoxes class

a96660a

Solution for headless build?

6af7e96

define the in headless non existing QDialog as void and send messages to the appropriate output stream

Fixing merge errors

7125707

Added CMsgBoxes and CCommanlineOptions to global.h,main.cpp

1b17d48

Modified messageboxes to use the new CMsgBoxes class

cd7b785

Bugfix non Windows exit

a675833

ann0see added a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2024

Fix connection status issue (jamulussoftware#2519)

2b8ac6e

This is a manual port of jamulussoftware#2550 by @pgScorpio Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2024

Fix connection status issue (#2519) #3364

Draft

5 tasks

ann0see closed this Sep 8, 2024

ann0see added a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2024

Fix connection status issue (jamulussoftware#2519)

b12ce7e

This is a manual port of jamulussoftware#2550 by @pgScorpio Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see added a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2024

Fix connection status issue (jamulussoftware#2519)

2b9d985

This is a manual port of jamulussoftware#2550 by @pgScorpio Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see added a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2024

Fix connection status issue (jamulussoftware#2519)

38fb414

This is a manual port of jamulussoftware#2550 by @pgScorpio Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2024

Refactor UpdateDisplay() to call UpdateUploadRate() #3369

Merged

5 tasks

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 13, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect out to CClient

0b6a2bb

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect functionality out to CClient #3372

Open

5 tasks

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 15, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect out to CClient

57825bf

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect out to CClient

8bc81d7

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect out to CClient

0f9a605

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect out to CClient

596e42b

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 22, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect out to CClient

65622ee

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Sep 22, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect out to CClient

1957532

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2024

Refactor Connect and Disconnect out to CClient

e27569f

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2024

Refactor Connect out to CClient

ae31a65

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2024

Refactor Connect out to CClient

8b0b44d

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2024

Refactor Connect out to CClient

8e48c03

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2024

Refactor Connect out to CClient

9f93619

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2024

Refactor Connect out to CClient

4642e40

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2024

Refactor Connect out to CClient

b996df2

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Nov 4, 2024

Refactor Connect out to CClient

7b420ff

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

ann0see pushed a commit to ann0see/jamulus that referenced this pull request Nov 4, 2024

Refactor Connect out to CClient

a77dcfe

This is an extract from jamulussoftware#2550 Co-authored-by: ann0see <[email protected]>

	if ( !pClient->SoundIsRunning() ) // ---> pgScorpio Was pClient->IsCallbackEntered()
	if ( !pClient->SoundIsRunning() ) // Was pClient->IsCallbackEntered()

Connection status issue #2519 #2550

Connection status issue #2519 #2550

Conversation

pgScorpio commented Mar 25, 2022 • edited Loading

Checklist

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pgScorpio commented Mar 26, 2022

pgScorpio commented Mar 26, 2022

ann0see commented Mar 26, 2022

ann0see commented Mar 26, 2022 • edited Loading

pgScorpio commented Mar 26, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ann0see left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hoffie commented Apr 1, 2022

pgScorpio commented Apr 1, 2022

ann0see commented Sep 8, 2024

pgScorpio commented Sep 8, 2024

ann0see commented Sep 8, 2024

ann0see commented Sep 8, 2024

pgScorpio commented Mar 25, 2022 •

edited

Loading

ann0see commented Mar 26, 2022 •

edited

Loading