[gmpi] Re: Time Summary (was *Ping*)
- From: "Angus F. Hewlett" <amulet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 09:24:32 -0400 (EDT)
On Sun, 18 May 2003, Tim Hockin wrote:
> At first glance, the API is pretty obvious - any plugin that sends events to
> this latent plugin must send them some time-period early. We can put that
> in the API.
> But as David points out - what of beat-synced events? what of plugins that
> take some other realtime source (like audio) and turn them into events? All
> of those will be latent.
So either the latency has to propagate upstream through the plugs, or the
host has to run the plugs early.
> This doesn't actually enable any plugins that weren't possible without the
> API. What it does do is allow you to not have the latency of those plugins
> affect the whole graph.
yes... I'm still not entirely happy with this. I'd rather see a single
latency for the whole graph, not least because it makes the idea of
graphs-within-graphs much more transparent.
Regards,
Angus.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
