[gmpi] Re: Decision Time: 7.3 (was 7.4, but 7.3 was too detailed)

  • From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 09:28:43 +0100

On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 02:10:19 +0200, Koen Tanghe wrote:
> I'd rather go with the "flag is on the buffer" approach, simply because
> "being silent" is a property of the buffer in the first place.
> As for the in-place case, this is no problem, because the plugin can just
> change the "silence flag" to the "non-silence" state if it writes anything
> to the buffer. I don't see the problem here.

If theres exactly one buffer per port then it doesn't make any real
conceptual difference:

sample *buffer = gmpi_get_buffer(port[0]);
int     silent = gmpi_silentp(port[0]);

v's

buffer *buffer = gmpi_get_buffer(port[0]);
sample *buffer_data = gmpi_get_buffer_data(buffer);
int     silent = gmpi_silentp(buffer);

As Tim pointed out the signicant difference is in the behaviour of a
plugin that doesn't care about silence, if its a property of the port it
can safely be ignored.

Its just down to the semantics though, a buffer is something that can be
shared between inputs and an output, whereas a port is a single input or
output.

- Steve

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules:  Please stay on topic.  You are responsible for your own
words.  Please respect your fellow subscribers.  Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.

Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. gmpi
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2003