[gmpi] Re: Reqs 3.8
- From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:58:22 -0800
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:54:31PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:24:39AM -0800, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > What do you all think? Am I missing something? Is this too much
> > complexity?
>
> IIRC TDM plugins are not int, they are 48bit fixedpoint. The gain wouldn't
> be from not converting to float at every i/o it would be in the data not
> leaving the DSP processor at all.
Well, if we allow extensible types (shudder) the host can recognize that
these two plugins use TDM IO and connect them while leaving the buffers on
the card. Then a TDM-aware host can make that optimization. It means
adding types for things such as this. DO we really expect Digi to drop TDM
in favor of GMPI? They WANT to be incompatible.
> Dither plugins do not reaquire int output - you can losslessly represent
> 25bits of integer with IEEE float - you just need a known float->int
> mapping.
I know, I was just making a for instance :) By making the changers GMPI
plugins, we don;t need a second (even if it is very small) API.
You poked holes, but didn't offer a position. I think I know yours, though.
:)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
