[gmpi] Re: Decision Time: 7.1.1
- From: David Olofson <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 21:19:35 +0200
On Monday 09 June 2003 20.25, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > > One topic at a time. Let's bang out a majority (or better) on
> > > each topic, PLEASE.
> >
> > we don't know how much we are , and who we are. how we could
> > vote and be sure that it's representative of something. we must
> > clarify these points.
>
> This is true - we don't have a total member tally. I think a pure
> vote will not work. Rather, what we have been doing is taking a
> majority of the active and vocal members, and giving a final window
> for dissent from anyone.
>
> Any problems with that rather informal method?
Well, what are the alternatives...? There isn't really much point in
asking people who are not motivated to think through this thoroughly
- and I believe most people we could find, that are not on this list,
would belong in that category.
Anyway, my first thought in a situation like this would be to make a
list of technical pros and cons of each alternative, and try to be as
objective as possible about it. Doesn't really solve a problem like
this though, as we're aware of the pros and cons, but not the
importance of each one of them.
Anyway, here's my vote for now:
> Q 7.1.1: Do we support interleaved or mono buffers?
> a) Mono buffers only.
>
> b) Interleaved buffers only.
>
> c) Either, as requested by the plugin. Plugin chooses one
> (global or per-stream).
>
> d) Both, as requested by the plugin. Plugin can specify
> preference, but accept either (global or per-stream).
I like a), but I *think* c) could enable some performance improvement
often enough to motivate the extra host side complexity. (I assume
it's little more than a hint and hardwired code on the plugin side.)
So, unless I'm proven wrong, I vote for c).
I'm definitely against d). Too much plugin side complexity that cannot
be avoided. That stuff should be done once, host side.
As to using interleaved buffers in general, I think it has to be
properly motivated every time it's used. If you can't just pass
interleaved buffers from plugin to plugin most of the time, why have
them at all?
//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate
.- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------.
| Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. |
| RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. |
`-----------------------------------> http://audiality.org -'
--- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
