...this was quite insidious, but most of the problems
were in the test fixture. Treating the root context
on re-creation is something to be carefull though
While this isn't immediately relevant to the problem at hand,
it looks like a sensible idea to be able to explore
an existing data structure by iterators exposing pointers
(instead of reference wrappers).
Generally speaking, reference wrappers would be preferrable,
but, especially when the data structure relies on STL containers,
the default constructed values for resizing rule out
the standard reference wrapper, which can't be default
constructed. Using a custom variant would be equivalent
to using just a plain pointer (since both can be NULL and can be rebound)
...for the very specific situation when we want
to explore an existing data structure, and the
exploration assumes value semantics.
The workaround then is to use pointers as values.
This test setup is intended to emulate the situation
when adding jobs to the scheduler; thus we should use
an implicit sequence as root element.
I.e. we have to treat a wood, not a single tree
Note: test still fails, since we take a copy
of a Node object somewhere inadvertently
...attempt to build it based on the monadic iterator primitives.
Only problem is: need to find out relation between nodes
after the fact. In the real usage situation, this
is not a problem, since we have a state object
there, which can track the relation as it is established
there was the possibility for the random offset added in this test
to add up to a whole frame, which would cause the
re-quantisation to wrap to the next fame (and thus the
CHECK in line 110 to fail.
basically I've changed my mind to prefer an
infinite JobPlanningSequence, which is just
evaluated partially. This removes the need to
embody the logic of planning chunk generation,
which really is a different concern.
This is very much WIP. Gone out a bit on a limb here in introducing a new
term LPI just to make it possible to explain the idea of interfaces and
plugins. Not sure if it really works though. The real test is, of course,
if it makes sense to someone reading this; or is just a load of jibberish!
The ping-pong continues: this is, yet again, another attempt
to tighten up the text on 'professionalism'.
As ever, corrections, suggestions, etc most welcome.
DispatcherInterface_test now passes the compiler,
meaning that the interfaces are completely defined,
all the generated types are OK and all operations are
at least stubbed.
Replacing all those stubs will be the next step
decision: the base for any deadline calculations
is the expected real time corresponding to the grid origin.
This value is contained in the Timings record.
this clarifies the relation of TimeAnchor and Timings,
the latter act as a general spec and abstracted grid,
while the latter actually performs the conversion and
deadline checking
isn't actually *being subject to* a wider goal
or an inner demand -- isn't that exactly the core
of the distinction between "professionality"
as opposed to an attitude of someone "just doing his job"?
Rationale: this is the *support* Library.
The real "Lumiera-Library" does not exist yet.
liblumiera.so will be the *interface* every external
module / plug-in uses to get Lumiera functionality.
Especially the work on Library dependency clean-up
made outright clear, that this interface library
needs to be a separate piece of software, which is
carefully crafted, and more-or-less depends on the
whole application.
No problem if changes/questions are done to this section. As this section is
so important, the reviewer may correct, add or even reject the corrections
here.
We'll get there, iteratively.
