Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: "Stop after current" + "Next" (Read 14686 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

I suppose this is the intended behaviour but it seems inconvenient to me - when the playback (with "Stop after current" option enabled) actually stops, the "playlist cursor" does not advance to the next song. Any way to force it to go to the next?
mobilegalaxy.co.uk

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #1 –
Double click on the next track. 

Seriously, there's no way to get the cursor to advance when "stop after current" is enabled..

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #2 –
Quote from: Curi0us_George on
Double click on the next track. 

Seriously, there's no way to get the cursor to advance when "stop after current" is enabled..


Hello,

I have been a thorough user of foobar for some time now and wouldn't go back to any other player.

Somehow, I have been unable to find an answer to this question on the forum so here goes :
Is there any reason I'm overlooking why "Stop after current" behaves this way ? Is it because it is the intented behaviour and/or because of programming limitations ?

It seems to me, based on my own usage of the option, that it makes more sense that the playlist would advance to the next song when the current one has finished and the playback is stopped, so when you hit play again you continue listening to the rest of your playlist. As of now, when I use this option, I'm forced to resume play on the next track and stop immediately in order to start with this one again when I start playback later.

I'm aware that it probably makes sense to a lot of people that it works this way, since it's been this way in foobar for long it seems. However, my way of using it seems pretty logical so if it was possible to put an option in preferences to activate the behaviour I'm looking for, just like the "reset stop-after-current after stopping", I would like it very much.

Thank you

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #3 –
+1, I also miss this feature.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #4 –
How would you store the "start here next time" position if you have the "Playback follows cursor" mode disabled?

Edit:[/u] Ah, it's remembered somewhere internally, consider the above question irrelevant.
Full-quoting makes you scroll past the same junk over and over.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #5 –
Quote from: kschoice on
Somehow, I have been unable to find an answer to this question on the forum so here goes :
Is there any reason I'm overlooking why "Stop after current" behaves this way ? Is it because it is the intented behaviour and/or because of programming limitations ?
I'd say it's pretty obviously intended behavior considering they can get the player to advance to the next track in other situations.

Quote from: kschoice on
It seems to me, based on my own usage of the option, that it makes more sense that the playlist would advance to the next song when the current one has finished and the playback is stopped, so when you hit play again you continue listening to the rest of your playlist. As of now, when I use this option, I'm forced to resume play on the next track and stop immediately in order to start with this one again when I start playback later.
Why not just hit "Next" instead? It functions as you wish.
elevatorladylevitateme

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #6 –
All the time I use "Stop after current" I wonder why it behaves like that. It's called stop after current, but what it's doing is more like stopping at the end of the track and then jumping back to the begin.
And I don't like to hit "next" because sometimes you don't know if you have used stop after current or pause. I just want to start where I stopped and hit "play" (on my keyboard) for that.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #7 –
If you can't remember if you paused it or not, is there really any harm in potentially skipping to the next track?

You can't remember anyways!
elevatorladylevitateme

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #8 –
> when the playback (with "Stop after current" option enabled) actually stops, the "playlist cursor" does not advance to the next song. Any way to force it to go to the next?

> so when you hit play again you continue listening to the rest of your playlist.

The command you seek is Next, and the last played song is remembered after exit. It is recognizable in the playlist by its focus border.

So when you want to go to bed, you hit Stop After Current, wait for it to end, exit, sleep, and the next morning you can continue from there with Next.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #9 –
Theres also an option called "resume playback after restart", very handy.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #10 –
Quote from: shakey_snake on
Why not just hit "Next" instead? It functions as you wish.


Why not hit "Next" indeed ? It makes sense, but only if I do keep track of the fact that I stopped with "Stop after current". If I don't have time to listen to the current track completely, then I hit "Stop" of course. But if I hit "Next" to resume playback, then I skip the track I haven't heard completely. As someone said, "Stop after current" currently behaves more like "Stop after current then go back to the beginning of current". If I stopped after current, then hitting "Play" should play what is immediately after current, hence the next song.
I am glad that I'm not the only person to find it disturbing to have to hit "next" where you should by all means hit "play". Anyway, as I said, I'm not asking for the general behavior to change, but for an option to activate the behavior expected by people like me.

Quote
If you can't remember if you paused it or not, is there really any harm in potentially skipping to the next track?

You can't remember anyways!


 
Don't you overlook the fact that using a computer in the first place is meant to avoid having to remember stuff ? Especially this kind of stuff. Seriously, if your point is that the user should remember what he's done the last time he ran foobar, then there's no need for features like remembering the last song played or even playlists. A command line one-song mp3 player should do the trick 

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #11 –
Quote from: kschoice on
Why not hit "Next" indeed ? It makes sense, but only if I do keep track of the fact that I stopped with "Stop after current". If I don't have time to listen to the current track completely, then I hit "Stop" of course. But if I hit "Next" to resume playback, then I skip the track I haven't heard completely. As someone said, "Stop after current" currently behaves more like "Stop after current then go back to the beginning of current". If I stopped after current, then hitting "Play" should play what is immediately after current, hence the next song.
I am glad that I'm not the only person to find it disturbing to have to hit "next" where you should by all means hit "play". Anyway, as I said, I'm not asking for the general behavior to change, but for an option to activate the behavior expected by people like me.


I fully agree to your argumentation. This behaviour is also strange for me and I asked myself the same question already.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #12 –
Quote from: kschoice on
Quote from: shakey_snake on

Why not just hit "Next" instead? It functions as you wish.


Why not hit "Next" indeed ? It makes sense, but only if I do keep track of the fact that I stopped with "Stop after current". If I don't have time to listen to the current track completely, then I hit "Stop" of course. But if I hit "Next" to resume playback, then I skip the track I haven't heard completely.
See, you're not thinking about it correctly. "Next" or "Play" shouldn't be used to "resume playback", that's the purpose of the (un)Pause button. Now, when playback is in a Paused state, the play button assumes the same function as the Pause button, but that's really a secondary function of Play, not the primary one.
Quote from: kschoice on
As someone said, "Stop after current" currently behaves more like "Stop after current then go back to the beginning of current". If I stopped after current, then hitting "Play" should play what is immediately after current, hence the next song.
But the Stop command functions as "stop then go back to the beginning of current". The same thing happens when you come to the end of a playlist while in the Default playback mode.

Perhaps what you are really want is a "Pause after Current" command?

Quote from: kschoice on
I am glad that I'm not the only person to find it disturbing to have to hit "next" where you should by all means hit "play". Anyway, as I said, I'm not asking for the general behavior to change, but for an option to activate the behavior expected by people like me.
I'm not sure you're requesting this in the most likely way to be implemented. If you asked for a "Pause after current" or "stop before next" or "Pause before next" command (all of which would accomplish the end you seek through different means), I think it might be more likely implemented, if not in in foobar's core, in some ones third party component.

Quote from: kschoice on
Quote

If you can't remember if you paused it or not, is there really any harm in potentially skipping to the next track?

You can't remember anyways!


 
Don't you overlook the fact that using a computer in the first place is meant to avoid having to remember stuff ? Especially this kind of stuff. Seriously, if your point is that the user should remember what he's done the last time he ran foobar, then (insert off topic speculation about what shakey_snake believes))
Honestly, I don't think you want me to get started on a philosophical tangent about how dangerous technology can be when our memories turn into pointers for externally stored data points, rather than containing the actual simple data point. But understand please understand that, no, not everyone uses a computer for the same reason you do.

But my point was that if a user can't be bothered to remember what his actions are, why is he bothered by what the next track plays is? It's a selective use of memory that I don't quite understand.

------------------

Maybe the real issue being raised here is that there is no way of telling which track will be played when in a stopped state and the play button is pressed. I personally don't understand why foobar would retain that track without at least giving the user some an indication as to what it is.
Perhaps the reason is help the user differentiate between stop and paused states, but I'm not convinced it can't be done more informatively: putting the stop symbol in the playing column of the playlist, perhaps.

Of course if users are lazy, this probably doesn't help them either. But then again, once the user reaches a certain point probably nothing does.
elevatorladylevitateme

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #13 –
Quote from: shakey_snake on
See, you're not thinking about it correctly. "Next" or "Play" shouldn't be used to "resume playback", that's the purpose of the (un)Pause button. Now, when playback is in a Paused state, the play button assumes the same function as the Pause button, but that's really a secondary function of Play, not the primary one.


See, in my messages, I never said that everyone else was "thinking about it uncorrectly". I don't even want to get in an argument about who is "thinking about it correctly". You know very well that the "Pause" state isn't stored when closing foobar, where as the next song to play is (in my mind, it is the next song to play, because when I will open foobar, hitting "Play" will play that song). Maybe "Play" hasn't been meant to resume playback yet, but why not do it as it makes sense, at least for a range of users.



Quote from: shakey_snake on
But the Stop command functions as "stop then go back to the beginning of current". The same thing happens when you come to the end of a playlist while in the Default playback mode.

Perhaps what you are really want is a "Pause after Current" command?


If you will, but why stick the player in "Pause" at the very beginning of a song, when stopping and set the next song to be the next one to play matches much more what the user means to do ? After reaching the end of a playlist, maybe in my paradigm it would make more sense that the player points to the first song in the playlist for future playback, or refuses to play again when hitting "Play", as the playlist is exhausted. I for one don't really mind about that case (as you don't mind about the case we're debating), but maybe some others would.
The behavior of Play/Pause/Stop/Next/Previous is inherited from good old hi-fi tape/CD players. On the one hand, people know exactly how they used to work on those devices, but on the other hand, we now dispose of PCs with MP3 files, so we can do much more evolved behaviors than that, and by no means we are bound to keep the limitations of previous media. "Stop after current" particularly is something that didn't exist then (at least to my knowledge), so it's up to us to decide what we're doing with it.


Quote from: shakey_snake on
I'm not sure you're requesting this in the most likely way to be implemented. If you asked for a "Pause after current" or "stop before next" or "Pause before next" command (all of which would accomplish the end you seek through different means), I think it might be more likely implemented, if not in in foobar's core, in some ones third party component.


I would be more than happy to work on an extension doing it myself, I'm just lacking time to get into foobar API, so if one would point me to an SDK documentation  (and maybe to the part dealing with what I want to do), or code samples doing similar things, that would help me greatly.




Quote from: shakey_snake on
Honestly, I don't think you want me to get started on a philosophical tangent about how dangerous technology can be when our memories turn into pointers for externally stored data points, rather than containing the actual simple data point. But understand please understand that, no, not everyone uses a computer for the same reason you do.

But my point was that if a user can't be bothered to remember what his actions are, why is he bothered by what the next track plays is? It's a selective use of memory that I don't quite understand.


I don't want to get in a philosophical argument either ; just stated that the very reason we built computers for is to compute and keep things for us. But that's really a moot point in our discussion. My point was just that if you're beginning to say that the user should remember everything, then foobar shouldn't even store a pointer to a track from session to session. After all, if you can't remember which track you played last, it doesn't matter which track you play now, according to your statement. Nevertheless, I find that sometimes you don't remember it directly, but when you see that the player stored it, you tell yourself "Ah yes, I didn't get to listen to that wonderful track last time, now I can hear it". And don't forget about those guys with memory problems...  Anyway, I don't even see why I would have to ask myself if I should hit "Play" or "Next" upon launching foobar, when it could remember the good thing to let me hit "Play" each and every time.

Quote from: shakey_snake on
Maybe the real issue being raised here is that there is no way of telling which track will be played when in a stopped state and the play button is pressed. I personally don't understand why foobar would retain that track without at least giving the user some an indication as to what it is.
Perhaps the reason is help the user differentiate between stop and paused states, but I'm not convinced it can't be done more informatively: putting the stop symbol in the playing column of the playlist, perhaps.

Of course if users are lazy, this probably doesn't help them either. But then again, once the user reaches a certain point probably nothing does.



My point is, there is a way to know exactly which track to play when in a stopped state and the play button is pressed. At least, one would be able to configure exactly the behavior he wants. That's just what I'm asking for.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #14 –
Do the people who don't want to change it (or get an option) really use the feature? Then please explain, why it is better to turn back to the start after "stop after current" then stopping before the next track.



Quote
If you asked for a "Pause after current" or "stop before next" or "Pause before next" command

I think "stop before next" should be exactly the same as "stop after current".
Quote
See, you're not thinking about it correctly. "Next" or "Play" shouldn't be used to "resume playback", that's the purpose of the (un)Pause button.

I use the "Play or Pause" button which "Starts, pauses or unpauses playback.".

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #15 –
Quote from: kschoice on
You know very well that the "Pause" state isn't stored when closing foobar


I at least know very well that paused state is stored, you just need to have the option enabled in preferences->playback->Resume playback after restart.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #16 –
Quote from: DotNoir on
I at least know very well that paused state is stored, you just need to have the option enabled in preferences->playback->Resume playback after restart.


Fair enough, but not everybody wants to start playback automatically upon restart. After all, foobar is also a mp3 tag editor, for example. And foobar doesn't have a feature : "Close foobar after current", either (which may be nice for some).

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #17 –
Quote from: kschoice on
Quote from: shakey_snake on

Maybe the real issue being raised here is that there is no way of telling which track will be played when in a stopped state and the play button is pressed. I personally don't understand why foobar would retain that track without at least giving the user some an indication as to what it is.
Perhaps the reason is help the user differentiate between stop and paused states, but I'm not convinced it can't be done more informatively: putting the stop symbol in the playing column of the playlist, perhaps.

Of course if users are lazy, this probably doesn't help them either. But then again, once the user reaches a certain point probably nothing does.



My point is, there is a way to know exactly which track to play when in a stopped state and the play button is pressed. At least, one would be able to configure exactly the behavior he wants. That's just what I'm asking for.
I think ( blinded by your evangelism for 'Stop before Next") you've misunderstood me here. When in a stopped state, all indicators (i.e. notification area tooltip, window title, Playing column of Default UI, status bar) go blank, even though a track is retained. This is maybe the real, underlying "problem" being addressed in this thread.  Changing the behavior of Stop after current does nothing to address this issue.

Quote from: Birk on
Do the people who don't want to change it (or get an option) really use the feature? Then please explain, why it is better to turn back to the start after "stop after current" then stopping before the next track.
yes. Because "Stop after current" functions just as "Stop" does elsewhere. Obfuscating the functionality of the word "stop" is needless.


Quote from: Birk on
Quote
If you asked for a "Pause after current" or "stop before next" or "Pause before next" command

I think "stop before next" should be exactly the same as "stop after current".
Well, they're different ideas.
elevatorladylevitateme

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #18 –
Quote from: shakey_snake on
Quote from: Birk on

Do the people who don't want to change it (or get an option) really use the feature? Then please explain, why it is better to turn back to the start after "stop after current" then stopping before the next track.
yes. Because "Stop after current" functions just as "Stop" does elsewhere. Obfuscating the functionality of the word "stop" is needless.


But, really, IMHO, there's no obfuscating the word "Stop" here. When you press "Stop" while playback, you break the flow of the current song being played, and it remains the current song in the playlist. If you would like to apply this behaviour to "Stop after current", you'd have to know what happens when you press "Stop" exactly at the moment between two tracks. But (in a gapless world) it's impossible (hence the feature "Stop after current"). Either you do it before the end of the first track, or after the second track has started. So "Stop after current" can behave one of these two ways, and some people think, unlike you, that it makes more sense that it behaves as though the second track has played for 1 microsecond, because the first one is already completed, and so we're not playing it anymore. To sum up : We play the current song till its end, reaching its end toggles switching to the next song, but as we checked "Stop after current", the player stops.

Quote from: shakey_snake on
Quote from: Birk on
Quote
If you asked for a "Pause after current" or "stop before next" or "Pause before next" command

I think "stop before next" should be exactly the same as "stop after current".
Well, they're different ideas.


We can call what we're asking for "Stop after current and next for 1 millisecond" if you like, but really do you think it's worth debating the name ?

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #19 –
Quote from: kschoice on
We can call what we're asking for "Stop after current and next for 1 millisecond" if you like, but really do you think it's worth debating the name ?

If you think I've been posting in this thread to debate something, you're assumed incorrectly.
There is no debate, what the foobar devs decided to do is ultimately final.
And even though exactly what you're requesting has been made multiple times (1. First post of this thread you bumped, 2. here, 3. here, and 4. here) it has thus far been ignored by them.

What I've tried to do is help you get to the root of your actual affliction, and have also suggested a way it might actually be implemented.
Consider foosion's (a developer) point at the end of this post here and lyx's point (who I don't believe is a dev, but I think has close relationship with them) here. Actually you might consider reading that entire thread.

Since you've refused to take my help or advice, consider me done here.
elevatorladylevitateme

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #20 –
Quote from: shakey_snake on
What I've tried to do is help you get to the root of your actual affliction, and have also suggested a way it might actually be implemented.
Consider foosion's (a developer) point at the end of this post here and lyx's point (who I don't believe is a dev, but I think has close relationship with them) here. Actually you might consider reading that entire thread.


I don't quite understand your point, since Lyx's point in the thread you're referring to is that developers only care about user problems and not their proposed way of solving it, and you say you tried in this thread to suggest a way my wish might be implemented. However, I thank you for referring for other occurences of the same wish, that I failed to find using the forum search. Actually, I decided to ask for it because I have good experience with developing free software, and I didn't think it would be a big deal.

I guess I'm stuck with implementing it myself, which is a shame because I take it that foobar SDK needs Visual Studio 2005 installed, and I don't intend to install it on my computer again, in the near future anyway.


Quote from: shakey_snake on
Since you've refused to take my help or advice, consider me done here.


I'm sorry you think this way, I didn't mean to refuse your help or advice.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #21 –
Well, for those who need it, I've made foo_son.

Description
It's a tiny component which adds a menu item called "Stop On Next" to the Playback menu. This option, when checked, makes the playback stop at the beginning of the next track. Unlike "Stop After Current", its state is not remembered over restart, and it is also always reset when playback stops in any way.

Why stop, not just pause?
Full stop and pause have many differences. Most importantly, when only paused, all the decoder/playback state is kept loaded and ready, the sound output devices are usually left opened, etc., which is not desirable in most cases. Likewise, the original "Stop After Current" functionality works this way and there also weren't any requirements about this in the discussion above.

Can the menu item be positioned directly under "Stop After Current" in the menu?
No. The other options above it are in one piece.

Download
(obsolete link removed - functionality integrated in fb2k 0.9.6) (2.5 KB)

Also, I challenge anyone to make a smaller, yet fully working and useful foobar2000 component.
Full-quoting makes you scroll past the same junk over and over.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #22 –
Many thanks, I'm going to test it immediately.
Cheers

Works like a charm
Thanks again

Moderation: Removed unnecessary full-quote of the preceding post.

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #23 –
Sorry, but I still have a small problem with it. The new option doesn't appear in the available commands for creating a toolbar button, whereas options from other additional components do appear. Am I missing something ?

"Stop after current" + "Next"

Reply #24 –
Well, yes, I screwed up. Unfortunately, the DLL was too big. See, it's 20 % smaller and works now.
Grab foo_son.dll version 0.0.2 from the same location (obsolete link removed - functionality integrated in fb2k 0.9.6) and be happy.
Full-quoting makes you scroll past the same junk over and over.