[gmpi] Re: Time Summary (was *Ping*)
- From: Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 16:53:04 -0400
>I think the point is that anything that is stored in the sequencer can be
>delivered timestamped for the future before it's timeslice. Anything that
>is realtime (user inputs, UI, MIDI, outputs from an upstream processor, etc)
>would have to be latent.
the only category there that interests me is "outputs from an upstream
processor". as several of us have noted, we can't do anything about
asynch input from user devices. but the upstream processors might be
mini-sequencers in themselves. they expect to deliver events with N
timeslices of latency, where N has been assumed by several of us to be
1. as soon as you require that some nodes can ask for longer event
delivery latency, each one of these nodes has to adjust what its
doing. doesn't seem very nice to me.
for a simple example, imagine something like a mini-pattern sequencer
running as a GMPI plugin, sending music data of some kind to other
plugins.
--p
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
