[gmpi] Re: Topic 6: Time representation

  • From: "Jeff McClintock" <jeffmcc@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 12:21:41 +1200

> What I'm thinking is basically that if sub-sample timestamp support
> can be made very simple and low cost, we might as well have it, just
> in case, and for those few cool applications. If it gets hairy, we
> need some strong reasons to work on it and squeeze it in. If those
> reasons don't exist, we should drop it.

With full respect to David.  I'm opposed to adding features we 'might need'.
It's very easy for a spec to get bloated with features that sound cool, but
never get used.
  Having 99% of plugins perform extra math on the timestamps seems
inefficient to me (not a huge overhead though I admit).

Best Regards,
Jeff M



----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: