Hello Chris,
As a developer, I hate this kind of email, but...
I have read in several posts about command line functions not being implemented yet. Is this truly a future project, or is it only going to be included if enough people ask for it? Once this is included, there is a whole other world that will open up to GoldWave...
Is there any way that a log file can be created with the exact specs used during media modification? Something like: filename - TIMESTAMP_FILE.log?
Thanks for all the great work man, I have really enjoyed using GoldWave over the past few years!
Shawn McKinley
Feature Requests
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4375
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:43 pm
- Location: St. John's, NL
- Contact:
Re: Feature Requests
Full control through the command line is unlikely. GoldWave is not designed to be a command line tool. A command line option for batch processing is being considered, but it will be very limited. The way it may work is that you'll have to set up everything under File | Batch Processing first, then you'll be able to do "/processfile" on the command line to process a file with the current settings. You won't be able to change any settings from the command line. After presets are added to batch processing, then "/processpreset" may be added to allow some control over what processing is done to a file.
There is currently no way to save a log file containing an exact list of modifications. If you right-click on the Undo button, you will see a simple list of recent changes, but no details.
Chris
There is currently no way to save a log file containing an exact list of modifications. If you right-click on the Undo button, you will see a simple list of recent changes, but no details.
Chris
Re: Feature Requests
This sounds great!then you'll be able to do "/processfile" on the command line to process a file with the current settings
This sounds even better!then "/processpreset" may be added to allow some control over what processing is done to a file
Are these additions planned for any near future releases?
One other question about the on-line manual. In it, under batch processing, it states...
Does this include the clip's title (so that while batch processing, there is no way to assing clip 1 as Title 1, clip 2 as Title 2, etc.)?Note that all processed files will have exactly the same information (except for ## track numbering mentioned above), so care must be taken when specifying file specific information such as Title. Also note that not all file types can store information.
Again, thanks for the software,
Shawn McKinley
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4375
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:43 pm
- Location: St. John's, NL
- Contact:
Re: Feature Requests
The "/processfile" command may be available within the next couple of updates. The preset one will take longer. Adding presets to batch processing is a big change.
The title cannot be assigned uniquely for each file in batch processing. Only the track number is changed.
Chris
The title cannot be assigned uniquely for each file in batch processing. Only the track number is changed.
Chris
A function could be written that would work with both cmdline and gui
Just have it so when /processfilepreset "preset" is called it'll render the same thing in the gu interface.
You could try using a string check function aswell.
i.e. (alogrithym)
If CharLeft (sPreset, 2 Char's) == "01"
{
ProcessFileNum(CharLeft(sPreset, 2 Char's)
}
So you'd have the preset's (i.e. wav, mp3, ogg) all set to numbers, and in the common dialogue box, just have them Numbered to help users remember which is what?
But I do see your point, you'd have to 're-case' all the filetypes..
Ahwell, sorry if i suck at explaining, i'll explain further if you ask.
Just have it so when /processfilepreset "preset" is called it'll render the same thing in the gu interface.
You could try using a string check function aswell.
i.e. (alogrithym)
If CharLeft (sPreset, 2 Char's) == "01"
{
ProcessFileNum(CharLeft(sPreset, 2 Char's)
}
So you'd have the preset's (i.e. wav, mp3, ogg) all set to numbers, and in the common dialogue box, just have them Numbered to help users remember which is what?
But I do see your point, you'd have to 're-case' all the filetypes..
Ahwell, sorry if i suck at explaining, i'll explain further if you ask.