TBH I'm not a fan of both solutions right now. In a test case you've pointed out I'd expect single patch emitted with:
- 5 elements removed:
(1, 2), (3, 4), (7, 8), (9, 10), (13, 14),
- 4 elements added:
(3, 4), (7, 8), (9, 10), (13, 14).
If we can't implement a structure listener this way, I'd prefer previous behaviour (emitting an "intermediate" patch with defaultA value used, and then a "final" one) than current (emitting the "final" patch, and removing/adding the same afterwards). However we should fire a structure listener once IMO if both elements are removed from numbers within a CallbackSequencer.
Originally posted by @bgrochal in #735 (comment)
TBH I'm not a fan of both solutions right now. In a test case you've pointed out I'd expect single patch emitted with:
(1, 2), (3, 4), (7, 8), (9, 10), (13, 14),(3, 4), (7, 8), (9, 10), (13, 14).If we can't implement a structure listener this way, I'd prefer previous behaviour (emitting an "intermediate" patch with
defaultAvalue used, and then a "final" one) than current (emitting the "final" patch, and removing/adding the same afterwards). However we should fire a structure listener once IMO if both elements are removed fromnumberswithin aCallbackSequencer.Originally posted by @bgrochal in #735 (comment)