[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Some time in the not too distant past, Han-Wen wrote:
> >I hope that you are aware that I will reject contributions that looks like
> >this
> >
> > if (chord_type_i == 0/*maj*/)
> > {
> > pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(0, 0, 0)); // Create a major
> > chord...
> > pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(2, 0, 0));
> > pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(4, 0, 0));
> > }
> > if (chord_type_i == 1/*min*/)
> > {
> > pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(0, 0, 0)); // Create minor chord...
> > pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(2, -1, 0));
> > pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(4, 0, 0));
> > }
> > if (chord_type_i == 2/*aug*/)
> > {
> >
> >If you need to resort to this, use struct initializers (or better yet,
> >get the info from GUILE)
>
> I don't understand your objection.
Your code repeats htis over and over
if (chord_type_i == X)
{
pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(X ))
pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(X ))
pitch_arr_.push(Musical_pitch(X ))
}
where the only real information is on the X-es. If you use struct
initializers, you can use a loop to code the above more efficiently
eg.
struct
{
int type;
int chords[3][];
} chords = {
{0, {{0,0,0},{2,0,0},{4,0,0}}},
...
}
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** GNU LilyPond - The Music Typesetter
http://www.cs.uu.nl/people/hanwen/lilypond/index.html
