Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA
From: Rick Burnett (destinytech_AT_spacey.net)
Date: Wed Jun 13 2001 - 02:55:27 EEST
I guess I do not understand *why* we would need some sort of generic
property mechanism. If it was found out that additional properties
were needed to be queried or changed in the future, you will still
have to put in the appropriate 'glue' code between the audio engine
and the audio drivers, right? So if this is the case, then there is
no reason to have a generic mechanism for setting and controlling
properties, my reasons being:
1. Only the new software requiring these properties would need them,
so they would be able to easily use the new methods to get to the
properties.
2. The engine code would already have to be rebuilt even for the new
properties since new code would be needed to handle these new
properties.
3. Old applications would be unaffected because they still refer to
the old method.
My whole argument with the 'generic' function for doing things is
there is always the case where the function does not work where it is
needed. Maybe you need to pass more data, like trying to pass
multiple arguments to a C thread that only takes one, there are dirty
approaches to work around this.
I have to say that from what I understand, and maybe I just don't get
it (which is certainly quite possible) I can see no reason not to just
put in what we need now, and as new things come along we add them. We
don't build an API that is designed to fix its problems with generic
functions but we add what we need when we get there.
In all honesty, we will probably see 6 months, a year down the road,
where things are turning, and parts of LAAGA WILL change to meet where
hardware and software are going. Does any of this make sense to
anyone else or am I just clueless ;)
FWIW,
Rick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jun 13 2001 - 05:19:49 EEST