2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
/******************************************************************************
|
2014-02-13 07:58:31 -08:00
|
|
|
Copyright (C) 2013-2014 by Hugh Bailey <obs.jim@gmail.com>
|
2014-01-11 15:34:15 -08:00
|
|
|
Copyright (C) 2014 by Zachary Lund <admin@computerquip.com>
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
|
|
|
|
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
|
2013-12-02 21:24:38 -08:00
|
|
|
the Free Software Foundation, either version 2 of the License, or
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
(at your option) any later version.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
|
2013-11-08 23:19:38 -08:00
|
|
|
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
|
|
|
|
GNU General Public License for more details.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
|
|
|
|
along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
|
|
|
|
******************************************************************************/
|
|
|
|
|
2013-12-22 16:42:02 -08:00
|
|
|
#include <obs.hpp>
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
#include <QMessageBox>
|
2014-01-25 08:08:56 -08:00
|
|
|
#include <QShowEvent>
|
2014-02-10 09:22:35 -08:00
|
|
|
#include <QFileDialog>
|
2013-12-29 08:17:00 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
#include <util/util.hpp>
|
|
|
|
#include <util/platform.h>
|
|
|
|
|
2013-11-23 22:38:52 -08:00
|
|
|
#include "obs-app.hpp"
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
#include "platform.hpp"
|
2014-01-24 20:19:50 -08:00
|
|
|
#include "window-basic-settings.hpp"
|
2013-12-29 07:54:06 -08:00
|
|
|
#include "window-namedialog.hpp"
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
#include "window-basic-main.hpp"
|
2014-03-23 01:07:54 -07:00
|
|
|
#include "window-basic-properties.hpp"
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
#include "qt-wrappers.hpp"
|
2014-03-23 01:07:54 -07:00
|
|
|
#include "display-helpers.hpp"
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
#include "ui_OBSBasic.h"
|
2014-01-09 17:51:51 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2013-12-29 07:54:06 -08:00
|
|
|
using namespace std;
|
2013-11-22 15:20:52 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
Q_DECLARE_METATYPE(OBSScene);
|
|
|
|
Q_DECLARE_METATYPE(OBSSceneItem);
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasic::OBSBasic(QWidget *parent)
|
|
|
|
: OBSMainWindow (parent),
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
outputTest (NULL),
|
2014-02-20 21:04:14 -08:00
|
|
|
sceneChanging (false),
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
resizeTimer (0),
|
2014-03-23 01:07:54 -07:00
|
|
|
properties (nullptr),
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
ui (new Ui::OBSBasic)
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
ui->setupUi(this);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-10 13:59:15 -07:00
|
|
|
static inline bool HasAudioDevices(const char *source_id)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
const char *output_id = source_id;
|
2014-03-23 01:07:54 -07:00
|
|
|
obs_properties_t props = obs_get_source_properties(
|
2014-03-10 13:59:15 -07:00
|
|
|
OBS_SOURCE_TYPE_INPUT, output_id, App()->GetLocale());
|
|
|
|
size_t count = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!props)
|
|
|
|
return false;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_property_t devices = obs_properties_get(props, "device_id");
|
|
|
|
if (devices)
|
|
|
|
count = obs_property_list_item_count(devices);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_properties_destroy(props);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return count != 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
bool OBSBasic::InitBasicConfigDefaults()
|
|
|
|
{
|
2014-03-10 13:59:15 -07:00
|
|
|
bool hasDesktopAudio = HasAudioDevices(App()->OutputAudioSource());
|
|
|
|
bool hasInputAudio = HasAudioDevices(App()->InputAudioSource());
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
config_set_default_int(basicConfig, "Window", "PosX", -1);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_int(basicConfig, "Window", "PosY", -1);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_int(basicConfig, "Window", "SizeX", -1);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_int(basicConfig, "Window", "SizeY", -1);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vector<MonitorInfo> monitors;
|
|
|
|
GetMonitors(monitors);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!monitors.size()) {
|
|
|
|
OBSErrorBox(NULL, "There appears to be no monitors. Er, this "
|
|
|
|
"technically shouldn't be possible.");
|
|
|
|
return false;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
uint32_t cx = monitors[0].cx;
|
|
|
|
uint32_t cy = monitors[0].cy;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
/* TODO: temporary */
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "OutputTemp", "URL", "");
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "OutputTemp", "Key", "");
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "OutputTemp", "VBitrate", 2500);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "OutputTemp", "ABitrate", 128);
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Video", "BaseCX", cx);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Video", "BaseCY", cy);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cx = cx * 10 / 15;
|
|
|
|
cy = cy * 10 / 15;
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Video", "OutputCX", cx);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Video", "OutputCY", cy);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Video", "FPSType", 0);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "Video", "FPSCommon", "30");
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Video", "FPSInt", 30);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Video", "FPSNum", 30);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Video", "FPSDen", 1);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Audio", "SampleRate", 44100);
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "Audio", "ChannelSetup",
|
|
|
|
"Stereo");
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_uint (basicConfig, "Audio", "BufferingTime", 1000);
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-07 11:56:31 -08:00
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "Audio", "DesktopDevice1",
|
2014-03-10 13:59:15 -07:00
|
|
|
hasDesktopAudio ? "default" : "disabled");
|
2014-03-07 11:56:31 -08:00
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "Audio", "DesktopDevice2",
|
|
|
|
"disabled");
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "Audio", "AuxDevice1",
|
2014-03-10 13:59:15 -07:00
|
|
|
hasInputAudio ? "default" : "disabled");
|
2014-03-07 11:56:31 -08:00
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "Audio", "AuxDevice2",
|
|
|
|
"disabled");
|
|
|
|
config_set_default_string(basicConfig, "Audio", "AuxDevice3",
|
|
|
|
"disabled");
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
return true;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bool OBSBasic::InitBasicConfig()
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
BPtr<char> configPath(os_get_config_path("obs-studio/basic/basic.ini"));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
int errorcode = basicConfig.Open(configPath, CONFIG_OPEN_ALWAYS);
|
|
|
|
if (errorcode != CONFIG_SUCCESS) {
|
|
|
|
OBSErrorBox(NULL, "Failed to open basic.ini: %d", errorcode);
|
|
|
|
return false;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return InitBasicConfigDefaults();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::OBSInit()
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
/* make sure it's fully displayed before doing any initialization */
|
|
|
|
show();
|
|
|
|
App()->processEvents();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!obs_startup())
|
|
|
|
throw "Failed to initialize libobs";
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
if (!InitBasicConfig())
|
|
|
|
throw "Failed to load basic.ini";
|
2014-02-22 19:14:19 -08:00
|
|
|
if (!ResetVideo())
|
|
|
|
throw "Failed to initialize video";
|
|
|
|
if (!ResetAudio())
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
throw "Failed to initialize audio";
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
signal_handler_connect(obs_signalhandler(), "source_add",
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasic::SourceAdded, this);
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
signal_handler_connect(obs_signalhandler(), "source_remove",
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasic::SourceRemoved, this);
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
signal_handler_connect(obs_signalhandler(), "channel_change",
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasic::ChannelChanged, this);
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-04 06:07:13 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO: this is a test, all modules will be searched for and loaded
|
|
|
|
* automatically later */
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_load_module("test-input");
|
2014-02-09 04:51:06 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_load_module("obs-ffmpeg");
|
2014-02-26 22:43:31 -08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef __APPLE__
|
|
|
|
obs_load_module("mac-capture");
|
2014-03-04 06:07:13 -08:00
|
|
|
#elif _WIN32
|
|
|
|
obs_load_module("win-wasapi");
|
2014-03-05 09:43:14 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_load_module("win-capture");
|
2014-03-10 15:02:37 -07:00
|
|
|
#else
|
|
|
|
obs_load_module("linux-xshm");
|
|
|
|
obs_load_module("linux-pulseaudio");
|
2014-02-26 22:43:31 -08:00
|
|
|
#endif
|
2014-03-07 16:03:34 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ResetAudioDevices();
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OBSBasic::~OBSBasic()
|
|
|
|
{
|
2014-03-23 01:07:54 -07:00
|
|
|
if (properties)
|
|
|
|
delete properties;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
/* free the lists before shutting down to remove the scene/item
|
|
|
|
* references */
|
|
|
|
ui->sources->clear();
|
|
|
|
ui->scenes->clear();
|
|
|
|
obs_shutdown();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSScene OBSBasic::GetCurrentScene()
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *item = ui->scenes->currentItem();
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
return item ? item->data(Qt::UserRole).value<OBSScene>() : nullptr;
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSSceneItem OBSBasic::GetCurrentSceneItem()
|
2014-01-30 00:31:52 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *item = ui->sources->currentItem();
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
return item ? item->data(Qt::UserRole).value<OBSSceneItem>() : nullptr;
|
2014-01-30 00:31:52 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::UpdateSources(OBSScene scene)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
ui->sources->clear();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_scene_enum_items(scene,
|
|
|
|
[] (obs_scene_t scene, obs_sceneitem_t item, void *p)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
OBSBasic *window = static_cast<OBSBasic*>(p);
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
window->InsertSceneItem(item);
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(scene);
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
return true;
|
|
|
|
}, this);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::InsertSceneItem(obs_sceneitem_t item)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = obs_sceneitem_getsource(item);
|
|
|
|
const char *name = obs_source_getname(source);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *listItem = new QListWidgetItem(QT_UTF8(name));
|
|
|
|
listItem->setData(Qt::UserRole,
|
|
|
|
QVariant::fromValue(OBSSceneItem(item)));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ui->sources->insertItem(0, listItem);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
/* Qt callbacks for invokeMethod */
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::AddScene(OBSSource source)
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
const char *name = obs_source_getname(source);
|
|
|
|
obs_scene_t scene = obs_scene_fromsource(source);
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *item = new QListWidgetItem(QT_UTF8(name));
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
item->setData(Qt::UserRole, QVariant::fromValue(OBSScene(scene)));
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
ui->scenes->addItem(item);
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
signal_handler_t handler = obs_source_signalhandler(source);
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
signal_handler_connect(handler, "item_add",
|
2014-02-23 17:58:01 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasic::SceneItemAdded, this);
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
signal_handler_connect(handler, "item_remove",
|
2014-02-23 17:58:01 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasic::SceneItemRemoved, this);
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::RemoveScene(OBSSource source)
|
2013-12-28 21:29:13 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
const char *name = obs_source_getname(source);
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *sel = ui->scenes->currentItem();
|
|
|
|
QList<QListWidgetItem*> items = ui->scenes->findItems(QT_UTF8(name),
|
|
|
|
Qt::MatchExactly);
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
if (sel != nullptr) {
|
|
|
|
if (items.contains(sel))
|
|
|
|
ui->sources->clear();
|
|
|
|
delete sel;
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::AddSceneItem(OBSSceneItem item)
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_scene_t scene = obs_sceneitem_getscene(item);
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = obs_sceneitem_getsource(item);
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
if (GetCurrentScene() == scene)
|
|
|
|
InsertSceneItem(item);
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sourceSceneRefs[source] = sourceSceneRefs[source] + 1;
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::RemoveSceneItem(OBSSceneItem item)
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_scene_t scene = obs_sceneitem_getscene(item);
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
if (GetCurrentScene() == scene) {
|
2014-01-23 22:58:48 -08:00
|
|
|
for (int i = 0; i < ui->sources->count(); i++) {
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *listItem = ui->sources->item(i);
|
|
|
|
QVariant userData = listItem->data(Qt::UserRole);
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
if (userData.value<OBSSceneItem>() == item) {
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
delete listItem;
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2014-01-04 18:26:15 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = obs_sceneitem_getsource(item);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
int scenes = sourceSceneRefs[source] - 1;
|
|
|
|
if (scenes == 0) {
|
|
|
|
obs_source_remove(source);
|
|
|
|
sourceSceneRefs.erase(source);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::UpdateSceneSelection(OBSSource source)
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (source) {
|
|
|
|
obs_source_type type;
|
|
|
|
obs_source_gettype(source, &type, NULL);
|
|
|
|
|
Revamp API and start using doxygen
The API used to be designed in such a way to where it would expect
exports for each individual source/output/encoder/etc. You would export
functions for each and it would automatically load those functions based
on a specific naming scheme from the module.
The idea behind this was that I wanted to limit the usage of structures
in the API so only functions could be used. It was an interesting idea
in theory, but this idea turned out to be flawed in a number of ways:
1.) Requiring exports to create sources/outputs/encoders/etc meant that
you could not create them by any other means, which meant that
things like faruton's .net plugin would become difficult.
2.) Export function declarations could not be checked, therefore if you
created a function with the wrong parameters and parameter types,
the compiler wouldn't know how to check for that.
3.) Required overly complex load functions in libobs just to handle it.
It makes much more sense to just have a load function that you call
manually. Complexity is the bane of all good programs.
4.) It required that you have functions of specific names, which looked
and felt somewhat unsightly.
So, to fix these issues, I replaced it with a more commonly used API
scheme, seen commonly in places like kernels and typical C libraries
with abstraction. You simply create a structure that contains the
callback definitions, and you pass it to a function to register that
definition (such as obs_register_source), which you call in the
obs_module_load of the module.
It will also automatically check the structure size and ensure that it
only loads the required values if the structure happened to add new
values in an API change.
The "main" source file for each module must include obs-module.h, and
must use OBS_DECLARE_MODULE() within that source file.
Also, started writing some doxygen documentation in to the main library
headers. Will add more detailed documentation as I go.
2014-02-12 07:04:50 -08:00
|
|
|
if (type != OBS_SOURCE_TYPE_SCENE)
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
return;
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_scene_t scene = obs_scene_fromsource(source);
|
|
|
|
const char *name = obs_source_getname(source);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
QList<QListWidgetItem*> items =
|
|
|
|
ui->scenes->findItems(QT_UTF8(name), Qt::MatchExactly);
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-20 21:04:14 -08:00
|
|
|
if (items.count()) {
|
|
|
|
sceneChanging = true;
|
|
|
|
ui->scenes->setCurrentItem(items.first());
|
|
|
|
sceneChanging = false;
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
UpdateSources(scene);
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
2013-12-28 21:29:13 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* OBS Callbacks */
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::SceneItemAdded(void *data, calldata_t params)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
OBSBasic *window = static_cast<OBSBasic*>(data);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_sceneitem_t item = (obs_sceneitem_t)calldata_ptr(params, "item");
|
2013-12-28 21:29:13 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QMetaObject::invokeMethod(window, "AddSceneItem",
|
|
|
|
Q_ARG(OBSSceneItem, OBSSceneItem(item)));
|
2013-12-28 21:29:13 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::SceneItemRemoved(void *data, calldata_t params)
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasic *window = static_cast<OBSBasic*>(data);
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_sceneitem_t item = (obs_sceneitem_t)calldata_ptr(params, "item");
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QMetaObject::invokeMethod(window, "RemoveSceneItem",
|
|
|
|
Q_ARG(OBSSceneItem, OBSSceneItem(item)));
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::SourceAdded(void *data, calldata_t params)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = (obs_source_t)calldata_ptr(params, "source");
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_source_type type;
|
|
|
|
obs_source_gettype(source, &type, NULL);
|
|
|
|
|
Revamp API and start using doxygen
The API used to be designed in such a way to where it would expect
exports for each individual source/output/encoder/etc. You would export
functions for each and it would automatically load those functions based
on a specific naming scheme from the module.
The idea behind this was that I wanted to limit the usage of structures
in the API so only functions could be used. It was an interesting idea
in theory, but this idea turned out to be flawed in a number of ways:
1.) Requiring exports to create sources/outputs/encoders/etc meant that
you could not create them by any other means, which meant that
things like faruton's .net plugin would become difficult.
2.) Export function declarations could not be checked, therefore if you
created a function with the wrong parameters and parameter types,
the compiler wouldn't know how to check for that.
3.) Required overly complex load functions in libobs just to handle it.
It makes much more sense to just have a load function that you call
manually. Complexity is the bane of all good programs.
4.) It required that you have functions of specific names, which looked
and felt somewhat unsightly.
So, to fix these issues, I replaced it with a more commonly used API
scheme, seen commonly in places like kernels and typical C libraries
with abstraction. You simply create a structure that contains the
callback definitions, and you pass it to a function to register that
definition (such as obs_register_source), which you call in the
obs_module_load of the module.
It will also automatically check the structure size and ensure that it
only loads the required values if the structure happened to add new
values in an API change.
The "main" source file for each module must include obs-module.h, and
must use OBS_DECLARE_MODULE() within that source file.
Also, started writing some doxygen documentation in to the main library
headers. Will add more detailed documentation as I go.
2014-02-12 07:04:50 -08:00
|
|
|
if (type == OBS_SOURCE_TYPE_SCENE)
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QMetaObject::invokeMethod(static_cast<OBSBasic*>(data),
|
|
|
|
"AddScene",
|
|
|
|
Q_ARG(OBSSource, OBSSource(source)));
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::SourceRemoved(void *data, calldata_t params)
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = (obs_source_t)calldata_ptr(params, "source");
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2013-12-28 21:29:13 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_type type;
|
|
|
|
obs_source_gettype(source, &type, NULL);
|
|
|
|
|
Revamp API and start using doxygen
The API used to be designed in such a way to where it would expect
exports for each individual source/output/encoder/etc. You would export
functions for each and it would automatically load those functions based
on a specific naming scheme from the module.
The idea behind this was that I wanted to limit the usage of structures
in the API so only functions could be used. It was an interesting idea
in theory, but this idea turned out to be flawed in a number of ways:
1.) Requiring exports to create sources/outputs/encoders/etc meant that
you could not create them by any other means, which meant that
things like faruton's .net plugin would become difficult.
2.) Export function declarations could not be checked, therefore if you
created a function with the wrong parameters and parameter types,
the compiler wouldn't know how to check for that.
3.) Required overly complex load functions in libobs just to handle it.
It makes much more sense to just have a load function that you call
manually. Complexity is the bane of all good programs.
4.) It required that you have functions of specific names, which looked
and felt somewhat unsightly.
So, to fix these issues, I replaced it with a more commonly used API
scheme, seen commonly in places like kernels and typical C libraries
with abstraction. You simply create a structure that contains the
callback definitions, and you pass it to a function to register that
definition (such as obs_register_source), which you call in the
obs_module_load of the module.
It will also automatically check the structure size and ensure that it
only loads the required values if the structure happened to add new
values in an API change.
The "main" source file for each module must include obs-module.h, and
must use OBS_DECLARE_MODULE() within that source file.
Also, started writing some doxygen documentation in to the main library
headers. Will add more detailed documentation as I go.
2014-02-12 07:04:50 -08:00
|
|
|
if (type == OBS_SOURCE_TYPE_SCENE)
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QMetaObject::invokeMethod(static_cast<OBSBasic*>(data),
|
|
|
|
"RemoveScene",
|
|
|
|
Q_ARG(OBSSource, OBSSource(source)));
|
2013-12-28 04:33:16 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::ChannelChanged(void *data, calldata_t params)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = (obs_source_t)calldata_ptr(params, "source");
|
2014-03-01 04:54:55 -08:00
|
|
|
uint32_t channel = (uint32_t)calldata_int(params, "channel");
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (channel == 0)
|
2014-02-02 16:03:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QMetaObject::invokeMethod(static_cast<OBSBasic*>(data),
|
|
|
|
"UpdateSceneSelection",
|
|
|
|
Q_ARG(OBSSource, OBSSource(source)));
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-13 07:58:31 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::RenderMain(void *data, uint32_t cx, uint32_t cy)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2014-03-07 09:19:03 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasic *window = static_cast<OBSBasic*>(data);
|
|
|
|
gs_matrix_push();
|
|
|
|
gs_matrix_scale3f(window->previewScale, window->previewScale, 1.0f);
|
|
|
|
gs_matrix_translate3f(-window->previewX, -window->previewY, 0.0f);
|
2014-02-13 09:21:16 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_render_main_view();
|
2014-03-07 09:19:03 -08:00
|
|
|
gs_matrix_pop();
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(cx);
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(cy);
|
2014-02-13 07:58:31 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* Main class functions */
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-22 19:14:19 -08:00
|
|
|
bool OBSBasic::ResetVideo()
|
2013-12-22 22:40:07 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct obs_video_info ovi;
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
GetConfigFPS(ovi.fps_num, ovi.fps_den);
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ovi.graphics_module = App()->GetRenderModule();
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
ovi.base_width = (uint32_t)config_get_uint(basicConfig,
|
2013-12-22 22:40:07 -08:00
|
|
|
"Video", "BaseCX");
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
ovi.base_height = (uint32_t)config_get_uint(basicConfig,
|
2013-12-22 22:40:07 -08:00
|
|
|
"Video", "BaseCY");
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
ovi.output_width = (uint32_t)config_get_uint(basicConfig,
|
2013-12-22 22:40:07 -08:00
|
|
|
"Video", "OutputCX");
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
ovi.output_height = (uint32_t)config_get_uint(basicConfig,
|
2013-12-22 22:40:07 -08:00
|
|
|
"Video", "OutputCY");
|
2014-02-16 18:28:21 -08:00
|
|
|
ovi.output_format = VIDEO_FORMAT_I420;
|
|
|
|
ovi.adapter = 0;
|
|
|
|
ovi.gpu_conversion = true;
|
2014-01-09 17:51:51 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-03-07 09:19:03 -08:00
|
|
|
QTToGSWindow(ui->preview->winId(), ovi.window);
|
2013-12-22 22:40:07 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
//required to make opengl display stuff on osx(?)
|
2013-12-31 03:02:07 -08:00
|
|
|
ResizePreview(ovi.base_width, ovi.base_height);
|
2013-12-22 22:40:07 -08:00
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QSize size = ui->preview->size();
|
|
|
|
ovi.window_width = size.width();
|
|
|
|
ovi.window_height = size.height();
|
2013-12-31 03:02:07 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-02-22 19:14:19 -08:00
|
|
|
if (!obs_reset_video(&ovi))
|
|
|
|
return false;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_add_draw_callback(OBSBasic::RenderMain, this);
|
|
|
|
return true;
|
2014-01-09 18:08:20 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
2013-12-31 03:02:07 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-02-22 19:14:19 -08:00
|
|
|
bool OBSBasic::ResetAudio()
|
2014-01-09 18:08:20 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
Simplify media i/o interfaces
Completely revamped the entire media i/o data and handlers. The
original idea was to have a system that would have connecting media
inputs and outputs, but at a certain point I realized that this was an
unnecessary complexity for what we wanted to do. (Also, it reminded me
of directshow filters, and I HATE directshow with a passion, and
wouldn't wish it upon my greatest enemy)
Now, audio/video outputs are connected to directly, with better callback
handlers, and will eventually have the ability to automatically handle
conversions such as 4:4:4 to 4:2:0 when connecting to an input that uses
them. Doing this will allow the video/audio i/o handlers to also
prevent duplicate conversion, as well as make it easier/simple to use.
My true goal for this is to make output and encoder plugins as simple to
create as possible. I want to be able to be able to create an output
plugin with almost no real hassle of having to worry about image
conversions, media inputs/outputs, etc. A plugin developer shouldn't
have to handle that sort of stuff when he/she doesn't really need to.
Plugins will be able to simply create a callback via obs_video() and/or
obs_audio(), and they will automatically receive the audio/video data in
the formats requested via a simple callback, without needing to do
almost anything else at all.
2014-01-14 00:58:47 -08:00
|
|
|
struct audio_output_info ai;
|
2014-02-23 15:27:19 -08:00
|
|
|
ai.name = "Main Audio Track";
|
|
|
|
ai.format = AUDIO_FORMAT_FLOAT;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
ai.samples_per_sec = config_get_uint(basicConfig, "Audio",
|
2014-02-23 15:27:19 -08:00
|
|
|
"SampleRate");
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
const char *channelSetupStr = config_get_string(basicConfig,
|
2014-02-23 15:27:19 -08:00
|
|
|
"Audio", "ChannelSetup");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (strcmp(channelSetupStr, "Mono") == 0)
|
|
|
|
ai.speakers = SPEAKERS_MONO;
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
ai.speakers = SPEAKERS_STEREO;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
ai.buffer_ms = config_get_uint(basicConfig, "Audio", "BufferingTime");
|
2014-01-09 18:08:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return obs_reset_audio(&ai);
|
2013-12-22 22:40:07 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-07 16:03:34 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::ResetAudioDevice(const char *sourceId, const char *deviceName,
|
|
|
|
int channel)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
const char *deviceId = config_get_string(basicConfig, "Audio",
|
|
|
|
deviceName);
|
|
|
|
obs_source_t source;
|
|
|
|
obs_data_t settings;
|
|
|
|
bool same = false;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
source = obs_get_output_source(channel);
|
|
|
|
if (source) {
|
|
|
|
settings = obs_source_getsettings(source);
|
|
|
|
const char *curId = obs_data_getstring(settings, "device_id");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
same = (strcmp(curId, deviceId) == 0);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_data_release(settings);
|
|
|
|
obs_source_release(source);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!same)
|
|
|
|
obs_set_output_source(channel, nullptr);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!same && strcmp(deviceId, "disabled") != 0) {
|
|
|
|
obs_data_t settings = obs_data_create();
|
|
|
|
obs_data_setstring(settings, "device_id", deviceId);
|
|
|
|
source = obs_source_create(OBS_SOURCE_TYPE_INPUT,
|
|
|
|
sourceId, deviceName, settings);
|
|
|
|
obs_data_release(settings);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_set_output_source(channel, source);
|
|
|
|
obs_source_release(source);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::ResetAudioDevices()
|
2014-03-07 11:56:31 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-03-07 16:03:34 -08:00
|
|
|
ResetAudioDevice(App()->OutputAudioSource(), "DesktopDevice1", 1);
|
|
|
|
ResetAudioDevice(App()->OutputAudioSource(), "DesktopDevice2", 2);
|
|
|
|
ResetAudioDevice(App()->InputAudioSource(), "AuxDevice1", 3);
|
|
|
|
ResetAudioDevice(App()->InputAudioSource(), "AuxDevice2", 4);
|
|
|
|
ResetAudioDevice(App()->InputAudioSource(), "AuxDevice3", 5);
|
2014-03-07 11:56:31 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2013-12-31 03:02:07 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::ResizePreview(uint32_t cx, uint32_t cy)
|
2013-12-06 05:39:19 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-01-23 16:00:42 -08:00
|
|
|
QSize targetSize;
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2013-12-06 08:16:33 -08:00
|
|
|
/* resize preview panel to fix to the top section of the window */
|
2014-03-23 01:07:54 -07:00
|
|
|
targetSize = ui->preview->size();
|
|
|
|
GetScaleAndCenterPos(int(cx), int(cy),
|
|
|
|
targetSize.width(), targetSize.height(),
|
|
|
|
previewX, previewY, previewScale);
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-03-07 09:19:03 -08:00
|
|
|
if (isVisible()) {
|
|
|
|
if (resizeTimer)
|
|
|
|
killTimer(resizeTimer);
|
|
|
|
resizeTimer = startTimer(100);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2013-12-31 03:02:07 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::closeEvent(QCloseEvent *event)
|
2013-12-31 03:02:07 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(event);
|
2013-12-31 06:10:47 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::changeEvent(QEvent *event)
|
2013-12-31 06:10:47 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(event);
|
2013-11-23 22:38:52 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::resizeEvent(QResizeEvent *event)
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
struct obs_video_info ovi;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (obs_get_video_info(&ovi))
|
|
|
|
ResizePreview(ovi.base_width, ovi.base_height);
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(event);
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-07 09:19:03 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::timerEvent(QTimerEvent *event)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (event->timerId() == resizeTimer) {
|
|
|
|
killTimer(resizeTimer);
|
|
|
|
resizeTimer = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
QSize size = ui->preview->size();
|
|
|
|
obs_resize(size.width(), size.height());
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_action_New_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_action_Open_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_action_Save_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-20 21:04:14 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_scenes_currentItemChanged(QListWidgetItem *current,
|
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *prev)
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = NULL;
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-02-20 21:04:14 -08:00
|
|
|
if (sceneChanging)
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (current) {
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_scene_t scene;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-20 21:04:14 -08:00
|
|
|
scene = current->data(Qt::UserRole).value<OBSScene>();
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
source = obs_scene_getsource(scene);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-01-04 12:53:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO: allow transitions */
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_set_output_source(0, source);
|
2014-02-20 21:04:14 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(prev);
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_scenes_customContextMenuRequested(const QPoint &pos)
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(pos);
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionAddScene_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2013-12-29 07:54:06 -08:00
|
|
|
string name;
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
bool accepted = NameDialog::AskForName(this,
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.AddSceneDlg.Title"),
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.AddSceneDlg.Text"),
|
2013-12-29 07:54:06 -08:00
|
|
|
name);
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
if (accepted) {
|
2014-03-10 13:39:51 -07:00
|
|
|
if (name.empty()) {
|
|
|
|
QMessageBox::information(this,
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.NoNameEntered"),
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.NoNameEntered"));
|
|
|
|
on_actionAddScene_triggered();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2013-12-29 08:17:00 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = obs_get_source_by_name(name.c_str());
|
|
|
|
if (source) {
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QMessageBox::information(this,
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.NameExists.Title"),
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.NameExists.Text"));
|
2013-12-29 08:17:00 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_source_release(source);
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
on_actionAddScene_triggered();
|
2013-12-29 08:17:00 -08:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2013-12-29 07:54:06 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_scene_t scene = obs_scene_create(name.c_str());
|
2014-01-05 20:38:28 -08:00
|
|
|
source = obs_scene_getsource(scene);
|
|
|
|
obs_add_source(source);
|
2013-12-29 07:54:06 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_scene_release(scene);
|
2014-01-05 20:38:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_set_output_source(0, source);
|
2013-12-29 07:54:06 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionRemoveScene_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *item = ui->scenes->currentItem();
|
|
|
|
if (!item)
|
2013-12-29 19:01:19 -08:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QVariant userData = item->data(Qt::UserRole);
|
2014-02-02 13:26:23 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_scene_t scene = userData.value<OBSScene>();
|
2013-12-29 19:01:19 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = obs_scene_getsource(scene);
|
|
|
|
obs_source_remove(source);
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionSceneProperties_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionSceneUp_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionSceneDown_triggered()
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-02-20 21:04:14 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_sources_currentItemChanged(QListWidgetItem *current,
|
|
|
|
QListWidgetItem *prev)
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
2014-02-20 21:04:14 -08:00
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(current);
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(prev);
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_sources_customContextMenuRequested(const QPoint &pos)
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
/* TODO */
|
|
|
|
UNUSED_PARAMETER(pos);
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::AddSource(obs_scene_t scene, const char *id)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
string name;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bool success = false;
|
|
|
|
while (!success) {
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
bool accepted = NameDialog::AskForName(this,
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
Str("MainWindow.AddSourceDlg.Title"),
|
|
|
|
Str("MainWindow.AddSourceDlg.Text"),
|
|
|
|
name);
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
if (!accepted)
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-10 13:39:51 -07:00
|
|
|
if (name.empty()) {
|
|
|
|
QMessageBox::information(this,
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.NoNameEntered"),
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.NoNameEntered"));
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = obs_get_source_by_name(name.c_str());
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
if (!source) {
|
|
|
|
success = true;
|
2014-03-10 13:39:51 -07:00
|
|
|
break;
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QMessageBox::information(this,
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.NameExists.Title"),
|
|
|
|
QTStr("MainWindow.NameExists.Text"));
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_release(source);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (success) {
|
Revamp API and start using doxygen
The API used to be designed in such a way to where it would expect
exports for each individual source/output/encoder/etc. You would export
functions for each and it would automatically load those functions based
on a specific naming scheme from the module.
The idea behind this was that I wanted to limit the usage of structures
in the API so only functions could be used. It was an interesting idea
in theory, but this idea turned out to be flawed in a number of ways:
1.) Requiring exports to create sources/outputs/encoders/etc meant that
you could not create them by any other means, which meant that
things like faruton's .net plugin would become difficult.
2.) Export function declarations could not be checked, therefore if you
created a function with the wrong parameters and parameter types,
the compiler wouldn't know how to check for that.
3.) Required overly complex load functions in libobs just to handle it.
It makes much more sense to just have a load function that you call
manually. Complexity is the bane of all good programs.
4.) It required that you have functions of specific names, which looked
and felt somewhat unsightly.
So, to fix these issues, I replaced it with a more commonly used API
scheme, seen commonly in places like kernels and typical C libraries
with abstraction. You simply create a structure that contains the
callback definitions, and you pass it to a function to register that
definition (such as obs_register_source), which you call in the
obs_module_load of the module.
It will also automatically check the structure size and ensure that it
only loads the required values if the structure happened to add new
values in an API change.
The "main" source file for each module must include obs-module.h, and
must use OBS_DECLARE_MODULE() within that source file.
Also, started writing some doxygen documentation in to the main library
headers. Will add more detailed documentation as I go.
2014-02-12 07:04:50 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_t source = obs_source_create(OBS_SOURCE_TYPE_INPUT,
|
|
|
|
id, name.c_str(), NULL);
|
2014-01-06 19:20:18 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sourceSceneRefs[source] = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_add_source(source);
|
2014-02-14 14:13:36 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_scene_add(scene, source);
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_source_release(source);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::AddSourcePopupMenu(const QPoint &pos)
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSScene scene = GetCurrentScene();
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
const char *type;
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
bool foundValues = false;
|
|
|
|
size_t idx = 0;
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-01-30 00:31:52 -08:00
|
|
|
if (!scene)
|
2013-12-30 00:17:57 -08:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QMenu popup;
|
|
|
|
while (obs_enum_input_types(idx++, &type)) {
|
Revamp API and start using doxygen
The API used to be designed in such a way to where it would expect
exports for each individual source/output/encoder/etc. You would export
functions for each and it would automatically load those functions based
on a specific naming scheme from the module.
The idea behind this was that I wanted to limit the usage of structures
in the API so only functions could be used. It was an interesting idea
in theory, but this idea turned out to be flawed in a number of ways:
1.) Requiring exports to create sources/outputs/encoders/etc meant that
you could not create them by any other means, which meant that
things like faruton's .net plugin would become difficult.
2.) Export function declarations could not be checked, therefore if you
created a function with the wrong parameters and parameter types,
the compiler wouldn't know how to check for that.
3.) Required overly complex load functions in libobs just to handle it.
It makes much more sense to just have a load function that you call
manually. Complexity is the bane of all good programs.
4.) It required that you have functions of specific names, which looked
and felt somewhat unsightly.
So, to fix these issues, I replaced it with a more commonly used API
scheme, seen commonly in places like kernels and typical C libraries
with abstraction. You simply create a structure that contains the
callback definitions, and you pass it to a function to register that
definition (such as obs_register_source), which you call in the
obs_module_load of the module.
It will also automatically check the structure size and ensure that it
only loads the required values if the structure happened to add new
values in an API change.
The "main" source file for each module must include obs-module.h, and
must use OBS_DECLARE_MODULE() within that source file.
Also, started writing some doxygen documentation in to the main library
headers. Will add more detailed documentation as I go.
2014-02-12 07:04:50 -08:00
|
|
|
const char *name = obs_source_getdisplayname(
|
|
|
|
OBS_SOURCE_TYPE_INPUT,
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
type, App()->GetLocale());
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
QAction *popupItem = new QAction(QT_UTF8(name), this);
|
|
|
|
popupItem->setData(QT_UTF8(type));
|
|
|
|
popup.addAction(popupItem);
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
foundValues = true;
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
if (foundValues) {
|
|
|
|
QAction *ret = popup.exec(pos);
|
|
|
|
if (ret)
|
|
|
|
AddSource(scene, ret->data().toString().toUtf8());
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionAddSource_triggered()
|
2013-12-30 05:56:39 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
AddSourcePopupMenu(QCursor::pos());
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionRemoveSource_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-02-02 14:23:38 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSSceneItem item = GetCurrentSceneItem();
|
2014-01-30 00:31:52 -08:00
|
|
|
if (item)
|
|
|
|
obs_sceneitem_remove(item);
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionSourceProperties_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-03-23 01:07:54 -07:00
|
|
|
OBSSceneItem item = GetCurrentSceneItem();
|
|
|
|
OBSSource source = obs_sceneitem_getsource(item);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (source) {
|
|
|
|
delete properties;
|
|
|
|
properties = new OBSBasicProperties(this, source);
|
|
|
|
properties->Init();
|
|
|
|
}
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionSourceUp_triggered()
|
2013-11-07 15:45:03 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
}
|
2013-12-10 10:22:33 -08:00
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_actionSourceDown_triggered()
|
2013-12-10 20:14:45 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-04-02 19:06:33 -07:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::OutputStart(int errorcode)
|
2014-02-10 09:22:35 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-04-02 19:06:33 -07:00
|
|
|
if (errorcode != OBS_OUTPUT_SUCCESS) {
|
2014-02-10 09:22:35 -08:00
|
|
|
obs_output_destroy(outputTest);
|
|
|
|
outputTest = NULL;
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
ui->streamButton->setText("Stop Streaming");
|
|
|
|
}
|
2014-02-10 09:22:35 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
ui->streamButton->setEnabled(true);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-04-02 19:06:33 -07:00
|
|
|
static void OBSOutputStart(void *data, calldata_t params)
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-04-02 19:06:33 -07:00
|
|
|
int code = calldata_bool(params, "errorcode");
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
QMetaObject::invokeMethod(static_cast<OBSBasic*>(data),
|
2014-04-02 19:06:33 -07:00
|
|
|
"OutputStart", Q_ARG(int, code));
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* TODO: lots of temporary code */
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_streamButton_clicked()
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (outputTest) {
|
|
|
|
obs_output_destroy(outputTest);
|
|
|
|
outputTest = NULL;
|
|
|
|
ui->streamButton->setText("Start Streaming");
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
const char *url = config_get_string(basicConfig, "OutputTemp",
|
|
|
|
"URL");
|
|
|
|
const char *key = config_get_string(basicConfig, "OutputTemp",
|
|
|
|
"Key");
|
|
|
|
int vBitrate = config_get_uint(basicConfig, "OutputTemp",
|
|
|
|
"VBitrate");
|
|
|
|
int aBitrate = config_get_uint(basicConfig, "OutputTemp",
|
|
|
|
"ABitrate");
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-10 14:48:17 -07:00
|
|
|
if (!url)
|
2014-03-10 13:46:28 -07:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
string fullURL = url;
|
2014-03-10 14:48:17 -07:00
|
|
|
if (key && *key)
|
|
|
|
fullURL = fullURL + "/" + key;
|
2014-02-10 09:22:35 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_data_t data = obs_data_create();
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
obs_data_setstring(data, "filename", fullURL.c_str());
|
|
|
|
obs_data_setint(data, "audio_bitrate", aBitrate);
|
|
|
|
obs_data_setint(data, "video_bitrate", vBitrate);
|
2014-02-10 09:22:35 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
outputTest = obs_output_create("ffmpeg_output", "test", data);
|
|
|
|
obs_data_release(data);
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
if (!outputTest)
|
2014-02-10 09:22:35 -08:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
signal_handler_connect(obs_output_signalhandler(outputTest),
|
2014-04-02 19:06:33 -07:00
|
|
|
"start", OBSOutputStart, this);
|
2014-03-10 13:10:35 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obs_output_start(outputTest);
|
|
|
|
ui->streamButton->setEnabled(false);
|
2014-02-10 09:22:35 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Change the UI to Qt (work in progress)
--------------------------------------------------
Notes and details
--------------------------------------------------
Why was this done? Because wxWidgets was just lacking in many areas. I
know wxWidgets is designed to be used with native controls, and that's
great, but wxWidgets just is not a feature-complete toolkit for
multiplatform applications. It lacks in dialog editors, its code is
archaic and outdated, and I just feel frustrated every time I try to do
things with it.
Qt on the other hand.. I had to actually try Qt to realize how much
better it was as a toolkit. They've got everything from dialog editors,
to an IDE, a debugger, build tools, just everything, and it's all
top-notch and highly maintained. The focus of the toolkit is
application development, and they spend their time trying to help
people do exactly that: make programs. Great support, great tools,
and because of that, great toolkit. I just didn't want to alienate any
developers by being stubborn about native widgets.
There *are* some things that are rather lackluster about it and design
choices I disagree with though. For example, I realize that to have an
easy to use toolkit you have to have some level of code generation.
However, in my personal and humble opinion, moc just feels like a
terrible way to approach the problem. Even now I feel like there are a
variety of ways you could handle code generation and automatic
management of things like that. I don't like the idea of circumventing
the language itself like that. It feels like one giant massive hack.
--------------------------------------------------
Things that aren't working properly:
--------------------------------------------------
- Settings dialog is not implemented. The dialog is complete but the
code to handle the dialog hasn't been constructed yet.
- There is a problem with using Qt widgets as a device target on
windows, with at least OpenGL: if I have the preview widget
automatically resize itself, it seems to cause some sort of video
card failure that I don't understand.
- Because of the above, resizing the preview widget has been disabled
until I can figure out what's going on, so it's currently only a
32x32 area.
- Direct3D doesn't seem to render correctly either, seems that the
viewport is messed up or something. I'm sort of confused about
what's going on with it.
- The new main window seems to be triggering more race conditions than
the wxWidgets main window dialog did. I'm not entirely sure what's
going on here, but this may just be existing race conditions within
libobs itself that I just never spotted before (even though I tend to
be very thorough with race conditions any time I use variables
cross-thread)
2014-01-23 10:53:55 -08:00
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::on_settingsButton_clicked()
|
2013-12-10 10:22:33 -08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2014-01-24 20:19:50 -08:00
|
|
|
OBSBasicSettings settings(this);
|
|
|
|
settings.exec();
|
2013-12-10 10:22:33 -08:00
|
|
|
}
|
2014-03-06 20:08:12 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::GetFPSCommon(uint32_t &num, uint32_t &den) const
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
const char *val = config_get_string(basicConfig, "Video", "FPSCommon");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (strcmp(val, "10") == 0) {
|
|
|
|
num = 10;
|
|
|
|
den = 1;
|
|
|
|
} else if (strcmp(val, "20") == 0) {
|
|
|
|
num = 20;
|
|
|
|
den = 1;
|
|
|
|
} else if (strcmp(val, "25") == 0) {
|
|
|
|
num = 25;
|
|
|
|
den = 1;
|
|
|
|
} else if (strcmp(val, "29.97") == 0) {
|
|
|
|
num = 30000;
|
|
|
|
den = 1001;
|
|
|
|
} else if (strcmp(val, "48") == 0) {
|
|
|
|
num = 48;
|
|
|
|
den = 1;
|
|
|
|
} else if (strcmp(val, "59.94") == 0) {
|
|
|
|
num = 60000;
|
|
|
|
den = 1001;
|
|
|
|
} else if (strcmp(val, "60") == 0) {
|
|
|
|
num = 60;
|
|
|
|
den = 1;
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
num = 30;
|
|
|
|
den = 1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::GetFPSInteger(uint32_t &num, uint32_t &den) const
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
num = (uint32_t)config_get_uint(basicConfig, "Video", "FPSInt");
|
|
|
|
den = 1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::GetFPSFraction(uint32_t &num, uint32_t &den) const
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
num = (uint32_t)config_get_uint(basicConfig, "Video", "FPSNum");
|
|
|
|
den = (uint32_t)config_get_uint(basicConfig, "Video", "FPSDen");
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::GetFPSNanoseconds(uint32_t &num, uint32_t &den) const
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
num = 1000000000;
|
|
|
|
den = (uint32_t)config_get_uint(basicConfig, "Video", "FPSNS");
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::GetConfigFPS(uint32_t &num, uint32_t &den) const
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
uint32_t type = config_get_uint(basicConfig, "Video", "FPSType");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (type == 1) //"Integer"
|
|
|
|
GetFPSInteger(num, den);
|
|
|
|
else if (type == 2) //"Fraction"
|
|
|
|
GetFPSFraction(num, den);
|
|
|
|
else if (false) //"Nanoseconds", currently not implemented
|
|
|
|
GetFPSNanoseconds(num, den);
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
GetFPSCommon(num, den);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
config_t OBSBasic::Config() const
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return basicConfig;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2014-03-23 01:07:54 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void OBSBasic::UnloadProperties()
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
properties = nullptr;
|
|
|
|
}
|