How to propose (tiny?) changes to JUCE?


#1

Hello, all.

I have a list of tiny, probably very uncontroversial changes I’d like to make to JUCE and I suspect I’ll be generating more as I go.

For example, I think Thread’s constructor should be made explicit; and separately, that the documentation for Thread.wait() should point out that a negative time means “wait forever” (which isn’t instantly obvious from the code…)

What’s the best mechanism to accomplish this? Simply creating an individual entry here for each microrequest seems a little spammy but if Jules can take the load, it’s certainly easy enough… or, one could generate a delta-like-thing in some sort of system like git if that were convenient?

(I have a separate list of controversial changes, of course… :smiley: but I like JUCE a lot and my worm-can-opener takes too much effort…)


#2

If you’ve got a whole pile of small things, I’d prefer a ‘drip-drip-drip’ approach rather putting it all in one mega-post!

Typically, if I see a post with a bug or change request that’ll take < 5mins to do, then I’ll just do it immediately, because that’s quicker and easier than writing it down and remembering to come back to it later. But if a post looks like it’ll take me an hour to wade through, then I’ll probably have to put it off/add it to the to-do-list/get distracted and forget it/etc.

Good point about the wait() docs - I’ve just corrected that.

Also a good point about the thread constructor being explicit. Making more constructors explicit was one of my new-year resolutions, and I might actually have a quick scan through for other ones that I’ve missed…


#3

Brilliant then, I’ll just post tiny changes like that here as they pop up! Cheers.