Re: [linux-audio-dev] latest audioengine snapshot (laaga proposal)

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

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] latest audioengine snapshot (laaga proposal)
From: Richard C. Burnett (burnett_AT_tality.com)
Date: Fri Jun 15 2001 - 17:33:18 EEST


So why not make a plugin that you can use between LAAGA and an application
when other 'relative' timebases are needed. So, from what I have read,
LAAGA will have a finer resolution timebase than any of the other types,
you could just develop plugins that take in this value and spit out
others. This way, you could have different time bases all relative to
one?

Just an idea :)

Rick

On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Steve Harris wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 09:58:57PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> > >Yep, agreed it is more complicated, but, its less of a special case, and
> > >it allows for multiple timebases cleanly. On the downside it makes it more
> >
> > we don't *want* to allow for more timebases cleanly, do we? isn't the
> > whole point to have everything running in sync? if there are two apps
> > that wish to cooperate, we could have "well know port names" for apps
> > that publicize a timebase, but thats not the same as "the system
> > timebase".
>
> OK, well that matches what I was imagining, exept I wanted a System
> Timebase "plugin" with a timebase output, e.g. a well known plugin with a
> well known port. If its possible, whats to stop a plugin existing which
> reads SMPTE sync from hardware and produces a timebase signal in the same
> format as System Timebase, just seems a bit more useful. Its really not
> important though.
>
> > >I was imagining that the library would provide a timebase decoding
> > >function, or that the buffer pased to process could just be a c
> > >struct or whatever.
> >
> > i wouldn't want anything other than audio frame time at this level of
> > the library, though i'm slightly partial to a "time since interrupt"
> > value, which helps synchronize visual display when the interrupt
> > interval from the h/w is long. other time specifications (SMTPE, MTC,
> > etc.) are all to domain-specific and low resolution to be usefully
> > defined inside of LAAGA. i think.
>
> I don't understand the need for the time since interupt, but I'm
> prepared to take your word for it.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by defined. I think that at some point we need
> a standard data representation for things like that, otherwise it will be
> a disaster. A MIDI data representation would probably do though.
>
> - Steve
>

+------------------------+-----------------------+
| T a l i t y | +------+ |
+------------------------+ +----+-+ | |
| Richard Burnett | +-+ | |
| Senior Design Engineer +---+ +----+ |
| burnett_AT_tality.com | | |
| | | |
| Phone: 919.380.3014 | |
| Fax: 919.380.3903 | | |
+------------------------------------------------+


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jun 15 2001 - 17:36:24 EEST