Remove offensive language (Pt. 1) #11942
Conversation
The CO was renamed in mixxxdj/mixxx#11942.
Holzhaus
force-pushed
the
remove-offensive-language
branch
2 times, most recently
from
71c8555
to
03d336f
Compare
Holzhaus
force-pushed
the
remove-offensive-language
branch
from
03d336f
to
ad3bd7b
Compare
Also, convert the legacy `enum` to a scoped `enum class` and switch the enum to PascalCase.
I added this in 43535a7. I think the PR is big enough now, let's do further changes in subsequent PRs to keep stuff reviewable. |
|
Ah, and please merge this 2.4 into main before merging this PR (if necessary). This will make it easier to resolve conflicts afterwards, because I guess there will be a bunch of them due to the channelcount/samplerate refactoring. Corresponding manual PR is here btw: mixxxdj/manual#578 |
I assume this is not necessary anymore since you just did that an hour ago, right? |
| static unsigned char maxChannelsForType(AudioPathType type); | ||
|
|
||
| uint hashValue() const { | ||
| enum class AudioPathType : int { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
any particular reason for specifying the underlying type explicitly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
any particular reason for specifying the underlying type explicitly?
There is code that uses the enum's int value and converts between the types. Although the underlying type of a scoped enum class is always int if not otherwise specified, I thought that explicit is better than implicit and specifying a type shows that we actually care about the underlying type and want to use int here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think its only important to specify the underlying type when doing a bit_cast/reinterpret_cast on a struct that contains this. Otherwise the type is only specified to be as many bits wide as required to hold all enum values...
Just because we static_cast from and to int for this enum doesn't really mean that it needs to be represented in memory as an int... Anyways, I don't really see the usage warranted here, but idc. Just my two cents.
|
Feel free to merge. I have a follow-up PR in progress where we rename to |
|
Welp, here goes nothing. Lets see how many conflicts this creates. |
This is a partial fix for #11931. What is missing is the CO group rename of
[Master]and theEngineMasterrename, which would affect way more files.