[gmpi] Re: Topic 7: Audio packaging, Process-In-Place

  • From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 21:44:29 +0100

On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 11:54:37 -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:
> There are other arguments aginst baton-passing.  Steve thinks the complexity
> is too high.  I disagree, more or less.  I just want to make sure the
> arguments FOR it and AGAINST it are distilled to their actual value, before
> I let people discard it as an overly-complex new-fangled idea.  People are
> scared of change, I just don't want THAT to be a factor in the decision.

I'm not scared of change, my thoughts go something like: its more complex
than simple float[] buffers, it doesnt offer any new features, it maybe
gives a perfomance gain (though I still dont see how).

- Steve

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

  1. Home
  2. gmpi
  3. Archive
  4. 05-2003