[gmpi] Re: Topic 7: Audio packaging
- From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:42:34 -0700 (PDT)
> Also a question for Tim: For a given multichannel format, can you
> explain what the advantage of allowing a plug to order the channel
> buffers in any way it likes is? I'm not saying there isn't any, just
> that it's not intuitively obvious to me what it would be. So I'm
> asking.
The buffers are logically ordered by their semantics. the LEFT stream means
LEFT. I don't care what the physical position of the data wrt other data
is. This also goves the user the opportunity to swap LEFT and RIGHT
withouth ANY cleverness.
The simplicity of the design enables DEEP flexibility. As an API,
Flexibility is what we want.
We are implicitly defining the channel formats that GMPI understands by
codifying hint names. When 111.6 standard emerges, we won't have hints
for all the channel names. 111.6 capable plugins can still work, but
they'll need help from the user. Whereas if we explicity group channels,
the 111.6 standard won't be supported until GMPI supports it and then all
the hosts support it.
As designers of a forward-looking and forward-thinking API, we REALLY need
to consider things that feel a bit awkward but offer a TON of flexibility.
Again, I'll explain this and argue it until someone shows me one case where
it fails unsolvably. :)
Tim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
