Subject: RE: [linux-audio-dev] LADMEA revisited (was: LAAGA and supporting programs)
From: Karl MacMillan (karlmac_AT_peabody.jhu.edu)
Date: Tue Oct 02 2001 - 23:30:39 EEST
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Richard W.E. Furse wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> [...]
> > It is certainly true that there is only one type of "exchange" currently
> > written for JACK, and that is for low-latency PCM. This does not mean that
> > the API is not suitable for other types of connections, though. I think
> > the beauty of the JACK API is that the clients have so few
> > responsibilities, which actually makes it easier to provide different
> > backends. I would certainly be interested in some specific cases that you
> > think cannot be handled by the JACK api - as Paul said, now is a good time
> > to talk about these issues.
> >
> > Karl
> [....]
>
> Hmmm, LADMEA is written to be as short as possible with little/no
> redundancy, possibly at the slight expense of performance. Which features do
> you think LADMEA has that aren't necessary (other than the Codec spec which
> is a bit of an appendix)?
>
I don't quite understand what you are asking from the context of my mail.
I was not addressing LADMEA at all, but rather asking for clarification
about the complaints that you have about JACK. So it isn't clear to me why
you are asking what I think is unnecessary in LADMEA.
Karl
> --Richard
>
---------------------
Karl W. MacMillan
Computer Music Department
Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University
karlmac_AT_peabody.jhu.edu
mambo.peabody.jhu.edu/~karlmac
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Oct 02 2001 - 23:28:08 EEST