[gmpi] Re: Topic 6: Time representation

  • From: David Olofson <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 00:54:17 +0200

On Tuesday 13 May 2003 00.26, Mike Berry wrote:
> Well, I think that time should be a signed 64 bit int, so you can
> represent negative offsets and such. The extra 1 bit of range
> doesn't add too much.

Sure, but it doesn't matter much. You can mix signed offsets with 
unsigned and wrapping time, as the resulting bit patterns are exactly 
the same anyway. It's just a matter of interpretation of the results. 
If the basic operations are wrapped in SDK macros, plugin and host 
authors don't have to worry about how or why it works.


>       If we always have the plugins call a function to get the quanta,
> even if it is always audio samples in the current version, then we
> should nat have a problem redefining this later.

Sure, but how many plugins will actually get it right if they've never 
been tested with anything but audio samples?

Besides, I don't like compulsory divide instructions hardcoded into 
the event handling macros. :-)


//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: