with a8f59b75 feed is actually not only about feeds: it can pick music from both music and directories.
A nice addition might be to add weights to those sources: weights are only relevant to --random, and can bias the randomness towards one of the source.
Usage
./feed --weights 2:5 http://a.b/feed.xml /mydir/
This means that a result from mydir has much more chances to be picked than a result from the feed.
To be meaningful, the number of the weights must match the number of arguments. So,
./feed --weights 2:5 A B C
is incorrect, because there are three sources with only two weights. A fix could be
./feed --weights 2:5:1 A B C
Implementation
The biggest choice is whether we must first choose which source we want to use (using weights) and then apply the normal algorithm; or if all the source must be expanded, each audio assigned the weight of the source, and the random algorithm applied.
The second choice will actually say that running
./feed --weight 2:5 A B
will actually favor A, if A contains 20 files and B contains only 3 (20*2 = 40, 3*5 = 15).
The first choice is simpler to implement, makes computing faster (no need to "expand" all sources) and has a more predictable behaviour.
with a8f59b75 feed is actually not only about feeds: it can pick music from both music and directories.
A nice addition might be to add weights to those sources: weights are only relevant to `--random`, and can bias the randomness towards one of the source.
## Usage
`./feed --weights 2:5 http://a.b/feed.xml /mydir/`
This means that a result from `mydir` has much more chances to be picked than a result from the feed.
To be meaningful, the number of the weights must match the number of arguments. So,
`./feed --weights 2:5 A B C`
is incorrect, because there are three sources with only two weights. A fix could be
`./feed --weights 2:5:1 A B C`
## Implementation
The biggest choice is whether we must first choose which source we want to use (using weights) and then apply the normal algorithm; or if all the source must be expanded, each audio assigned the weight of the source, and the random algorithm applied.
The second choice will actually say that running
`./feed --weight 2:5 A B`
will actually favor A, if A contains 20 files and B contains only 3 (20*2 = 40, 3*5 = 15).
The first choice is simpler to implement, makes computing faster (no need to "expand" all sources) and has a more predictable behaviour.
with
a8f59b75feed is actually not only about feeds: it can pick music from both music and directories.A nice addition might be to add weights to those sources: weights are only relevant to
--random, and can bias the randomness towards one of the source.Usage
./feed --weights 2:5 http://a.b/feed.xml /mydir/This means that a result frommydirhas much more chances to be picked than a result from the feed. To be meaningful, the number of the weights must match the number of arguments. So,./feed --weights 2:5 A B Cis incorrect, because there are three sources with only two weights. A fix could be./feed --weights 2:5:1 A B CImplementation
The biggest choice is whether we must first choose which source we want to use (using weights) and then apply the normal algorithm; or if all the source must be expanded, each audio assigned the weight of the source, and the random algorithm applied.
The second choice will actually say that running
./feed --weight 2:5 A Bwill actually favor A, if A contains 20 files and B contains only 3 (20*2 = 40, 3*5 = 15).The first choice is simpler to implement, makes computing faster (no need to "expand" all sources) and has a more predictable behaviour.