Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] memory management
From: Richard Guenther (rguenth_AT_tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de)
Date: Mon Nov 26 2001 - 14:40:39 EET
On 26 Nov 2001, Josh Green wrote:
> On Sun, 2001-11-25 at 16:44, Paul Davis wrote:
> > >If you are planning on editing very large files, I would say no, you
> >
> > and if you're not planning on editing large files, go home and find
> > something better to do. the world is too full of little toy editors
> > that can't handle audio samples larger than physical RAM+swap.
> >
> > for that matter, i echo richard's sentiments. we don't need another
> > sound editor. we need improvements to the ones already under
> > development. you'll learn more, and learn faster, and the world (and
> > you) will get a useful editor sooner.
>
> I agree completely. But what we do need is a way to easily embed an
> editor with other audio type programs, such as Smurf :) Are we still of
> the opinion that this is not possible or worth while?
We have libgtkwaveform f.i. which you can use to embed a simple (read:
no large files, so sophisticated undo/redo) wave editor into any
app while keeping its internal wave data representation. Possibly adding
a simple LADSPA host library on top of libgtkwaveform would help, too.
Anything more complex would require too much knowledge of the other
audio type program. You f.i. could link with parts of the glame source
and just call glame_waveedit_gui_new() from your program. But of course
you'd either need to use the glame internal wave representation in your
program or convert between the two.
Richard.
-- Richard Guenther <richard.guenther_AT_uni-tuebingen.de> WWW: http://www.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de/~rguenth/ The GLAME Project: http://www.glame.de/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Nov 26 2001 - 14:36:26 EET