Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] No IPC in LADSPA?!
From: David Slomin (david.slomin_AT_av.com)
Date: Wed Mar 29 2000 - 23:56:18 EEST
Paul Barton-Davis wrote:
>
> The effect I was describing is a design "error" that allows parameter
> changes to take effect in a way that is not synchronized with audio
> synthesis. It allows a change to take place in the middle of the
> engine's cycle over all the current plugins/opcodes/ugens/flavor-of-the-week.
In traditional electronics, that's a "signal edge" problem. There,
you just standardize on something, either rising edge, falling edge,
zero crossing, whatever. In programming, that's precisely what locks
and mutexes were invented for... keeping your data from being modified
out from under you by another thread or process. I know locks tend
to be taboo when you're trying to keep latency down, but there
definitely are reasons to use them.
> Don't confuse LADSPA and its cousins with a generic
> framework for writing audio applications. Its a way to write plugins:
> pieces of code executed by a host application. The host may or may not
> implement some other standard to allow it to inter-operate with other
> applications on the same or other hosts, but whether or not it does so
> has *nothing* to do with LADSPA.
This is a wonderfully concise and practical point that has
unfortunately been lacking from the discussion for the past X
months. It should definitely go at the top of the FAQ. Thanks.
Div.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Mar 30 2000 - 01:13:28 EEST