[Empeg-general] Re: Auto-shuffle

[yn0t_@empegbbs-noreply.merlins.org]

I think I might have a solution that might work for both Bitt's dilemma and Doug/Tony's proposal of a "never randomize contents" option...  It could be complicated to implement, and without knowing how the Empeg normally generates running orders, it's hard for me to know if it'll work, but let's throw it on the wall and see if it sticks....

How about  having one tri-state check box named "Randomize Contents" such that:
checked - means it always randomizes contents no matter what
unchecked - means it never randomizes contents no matter what
grey-checked - (in-between checked and unchecked) means "go with the flow" and randomize if the *parent playlist* is set to always randomize, and don't randomize if the parent playlist is set to "don't randomize".

Grey-checked would be the default.

This would work different than the current behavior (I think) where the sub-playlists aren't checked to see if their randomize contents flag is set.  This is the part that would make generating running orders more complex, because it would require diving into the sub-playlist structure n-levels deep.

Some examples of how this might work:

1.  Bitt's Nirvana example, or "play all albums randomly, but each track in order, while *NOT* in shuffle mode."
Can already be done with existing "always randomize contents."  To implement in my scheme, the Nirvana playlist would be checked, and the album playlists would be unchecked (for never randomize.)

2. Bitt's Nirvana wish, or "play all tracks in this playlist, and all of its sub-playlists, in random order, while *NOT* in shuffle mode."
Can't  be done with existing functionality.  In my scheme, root playlist gets "always randomize contents," sub playlists are grey-checked.  Since the parent is set to always randomize, the sub-playlists will inherit that, and all Nirvana songs will be shuffled.

3.  Doug and Tony's "never randomize contents", while *IN* shuffle mode.
Can't be done now.  In my scheme just uncheck the "randomize contents" box.

"But Tony, since playlists are symbolic links, they can have multiple parents, what does "parent playlist" mean?

Well, in this context, the "parent" starts with whatever playlist you "drilled down to" in the playlist menu.  So if I drill down to the Nirvana playlist, and it has the box checked for "always randomize," and the album playlists (Bleach, Nevermind, etc.) have it grey-checked, they inherit the "always randomize" behavior.  However, if you browse to another playlist which happens to contain those album playlists, then the album playlists would inherit the behavior from *that* playlist instead, which might be "never randomize" or might even also be "inherit from parent."  However (and this part is kind of interesting) if you browse down to a parent which has the default grey check (meaning no preference for randomize or not) I would propose that the sub-playlists which also have no preference would automatically get the behavior of whatever shuffle mode you might be in.  That would allow Bitt's "Root playlist randomizes, but any sub-playlist plays in order" wish.  (I think!)

It's a little mind bending to think of all the possibilities, and I'm sure the algorithm for generating running orders is already pretty complicated.  I'm sure Peter can (if he can understand my rambling) shed light on if it's even possible to implement a scheme like this.  But I think this would allow for a LOT of flexibility in how playlists are randomized/ordered, without having to explicitly turn shuffle on.

So, the real question, will anyone at all understand what I'm saying in this post?  Including me?