Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and run_adding()

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and run_adding()
From: David Olofson (david_AT_gardena.net)
Date: Sun Nov 19 2000 - 13:49:13 EET


On Sat, 18 Nov 2000, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Paul Barton-Davis wrote:
>
> > I have to laugh - here's the exact opposite point of view from
> > vst-plugins today, about processReplacing, which is the equivalent of
> [...]
> > Can both points of view be right ?
>
> :) Yup, been following the same vst-plugins thread. But seriously,
> this guy is just comparing run_adding() and run_replacing() using one
> use case.

Yep. And we actually have three situations to take into consideration
here;

        1) plugin taking data from one buffer, mixing into another

        2) plugin taking data from one buffer, overwriting another

        3) plugin taking data from a buffer, while overwriting it

The third case is what breaks some of the reasoning behind switching
to run_adding() as the default. run_adding() requires extra buffer +
zero operation in chains (3), whereas run() requires extra buffer +
add in mixers (1). run_adding() also requires an extra zero operation
to overwrite a buffer (2).

//David

.- M u C o S -------------------------. .- David Olofson --------.
| A Free/Open Source | | Audio Hacker |
| Plugin and Integration Standard | | Linux Advocate |
| for | | Open Source Advocate |
| Professional and Consumer | | Singer |
| Multimedia | | Songwriter |
`-----> http://www.linuxdj.com/mucos -' `---> david_AT_linuxdj.com -'


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Nov 19 2000 - 14:56:08 EET