[gmpi] Re: entity naming
- From: "Koen Tanghe" <koen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 12:00:01 +0100
On Thursday, December 01, 2005 1:25 AM [GMT+1=CET],
Jeff McClintock <xxxjeffmcc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Koen,
Add my vote.
The data that passes through control IOs = event buffers.
How about event que instead?
Also possible. I tend to prefer buffer, as that seems to lend itself more as
an object that travels around on a wire (which makes it easy to think about
data flows).
Of course this will probably be implemented as a queue.
If moost people prefer event queue instead of event buffer, that's fine too.
As long as we then try to be consistent in the spec.
Koen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: http://www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe
Other related posts:
- » [gmpi] entity naming
- » [gmpi] Re: entity naming
- » [gmpi] Re: entity naming
- » [gmpi] Re: entity naming
- » [gmpi] Re: entity naming
- » [gmpi] Re: entity naming
- » [gmpi] Re: entity naming
- » [gmpi] Re: entity naming
Hi Koen,
Add my vote.
The data that passes through control IOs = event buffers.
How about event que instead?