Add support for offset_cc
#170
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Rebased in order to make it readable (since the base branch changed after the PR) |
jpcima
reviewed
Apr 15, 2020
| @@ -59,6 +59,12 @@ bool sfz::Region::parseOpcode(const Opcode& opcode) | |||
| case hash("offset_random"): | |||
| setValueFromOpcode(opcode, offsetRandom, Default::offsetRange); | |||
| break; | |||
| case hash("offset_cc&"): | |||
| if (opcode.parameters.back() > config::numCCs) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I note there exist multiple occurrences of ccNumber > config::numCCs in code.
There is also for (int cc = 0; cc < config::numCCs; cc++).
One of these has to be wrong. Perhaps instead the checks should use >=.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You're right it should be >= in all these checks.
jpcima
approved these changes
Apr 15, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #159
It will be cleaner once the changes from #166 are merged