[openbeos-midi] Re: activity/status?

  • From: "Martijn Sipkema" <msipkema@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <openbeos-midi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 07:32:39 +0100

> >implemented anything? I saw on the list archives that you were
> >planning on implementing the old midi kit. Why do you not start
> >with the midi2 kit?
> Because it isn't documented, no applications (that I know of) were written
for it,
> and it is really outside the scope of an R1, in a way. Additionally,
> JUST a midi2 kit would not give us backward compatability.

I wrote some applications for the midi2 kit: 1808, 2488, 2489 on bebits.
Also apps 1494, 1576, 2201, 2228, 2418 are for the midi2 kit. There
aren't that many applications for the old midi kit either and it really is

> >Also, there are not that many midi applications
> >for beos and for most the source is not available, so even complete
> >source code compatibility is not needed. The midi2 kit in beos 5
> >contained several bugs and was never documented. In dano it
> >behaved differently. If I can do anything to help, say so. I'm
> >working on a midi api for *nix.
> We could definately use some help. But midi2 is in the same catagory as
> the new interface kit and others. Probably better, but not backward
> with previous apps, so not in R1.

That's ok.

> OTOH, much of the work for midi would be the
> same for midi2 (i.e. parsing midi files, reading and writing to the serial
ports, synth,
> etc). So the difference between the two should not be 2X as much effort.

For drivers you should probably take a look at ALSA.


Other related posts: