-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 91
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Refactor cdrdao toc/table functions into Task and provide progress output #345
Conversation
Didn't know you used Flake8. I'll go take a look at implementing the changes so it passes later if needed/wanted. |
💖 Thanks for opening your first pull request here! 💖
I've just rebased your branch on whipper's |
Argh. It took me longer to rebase them onto a single commit but I'll see what I can do. |
From my personal feature branch (without the single commit rebase) I'll look over each commit and provide a more detailed commit message for each commit.
|
Alright. Redid my issue/299 branch privately with more commits and more of an explanation per commit. That being said I merged the bugfix/issue-335-drop-caching branch from upstream into it and then realized that it's technically not merged into master yet. What's the best course of action in your opinion? |
Managed to undo that merge via rebase and force pushed an update to issue/299 |
A note: The progress for reading TOC/table isn't "exact" because it updates the progress upon cdrdao having started analyzing a track, as opposed after it's finished analyzing a track. Just thought I'd mention that. |
fa3bdff
to
899e15f
Compare
I've just rebased your branch on whipper's develop, squashed some commits and fixed flake8's warnings with a separate commit. |
960cba1
to
d123215
Compare
Why is it called ReadTOC_Task with a '_' now? (Just a nitpick) |
Because while I was debugging cdrdao.py I wanted to have both functions still available. I'm sure it can be safely changed back now. Oops. |
d123215
to
be1e275
Compare
1cddc55
to
be1e275
Compare
I've just rebased your branch on whipper's develop (fixing the conflicts) and restored the old task name ( |
I see. Thanks! |
Related issue #173. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just from looking at the code, I don't see anything wrong, but the meat of it is also more grok at 11 PM as I'm winding down and getting ready for sleep. :)
A couple of stylistic comments at least though.
Implemented the style changes. With regards to your comment on IRC (about the mix of single and double quotes) how do you feel it should be done? I was trying to emulate the style of whipper/programs/cdparanoia.py (Which I read to understand the task system) |
7aab6d4
to
d121feb
Compare
I usually go for single quoting in my own projects, but am fine with double quotes too. Just as long as it's consistent. Anyway, I didn't remark on it on my previous comment to this PR, because it is irrelevant to this PR. Please just keep your commits atomic and your PRs self-contained. If we want to fix quotation style, that is its own PR (or something that can be done gradually in other PRs once it's been decided on one way or another). Edit: I just now see that @JoeLametta went ahead and added a commit to this PR anyway, making https://github.com/whipper-team/whipper/pull/345/files even harder to make sense of. 🤦♂️ @JoeLametta, can we please try and keep PRs self-contained? Please? 🙇♂️ |
d121feb
to
4d313b7
Compare
@Freso Sorry for the mess, I've redone everything from scratch. Hope it's better this time... |
I agree. |
@Freso Do you think latest revision of this pull requests is ready for merging? |
Something that might be out of scope for this PR but worthwhile for the 1.0 milestone: My uncle pointed out recently when I was showing him the code and explaining to him how it works (He's been a long time Linux user, but not much of a programmer outside of very trivial Python tasks and specifically was an early user of cdparanoia/cdda2wav and EAC in late 90's. He thinks the functionality of the code is great but it should have some documentation explaining the concept of Q sub-channel errors and what it means for ripping the disc. In my case with a TSSTCorp SH-S223L and some scratched CD's I tested with, getting above 1500 Q sub-channel errors on a track usually means I cant reliably rip said track because whipper gets CRC mismatches in Test and Copy mode. |
👍 |
Congrats on merging your first pull request! 🎉🎉🎉 |
This introduced #374 |
Broken since whipper-team#345 was merged. Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@saftware.de>
Output lines of cdrdao for single digit track numbers with a whitespace character. Broken since whipper-team#345 was merged. Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@saftware.de>
Broken since whipper-team#345 was merged. Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@saftware.de>
Output lines of cdrdao for single digit track numbers start with a whitespace character. Broken since whipper-team#345 was merged. Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@saftware.de>
This PR fixes issue #299 and also refactors the cdrdao read toc function into a Task as a prerequisite for this. I've rebased my changes against the upstream/develop branch and ran a test rip just now.
A question. Now that at present we aren't using fast_toc, do we really need to read the TOC and table separately, when it appears they contain the same data, except for the offset in the table. Would shave some time off ripping if it's possible to only need to do it once, but I feel such a change would be out of scope of this PR.
Fixes #299.