On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 14:00 +0200, Jay Vaughan wrote:
> no, right, there are multiple MIDI API's on Linux and I think this is
> a good thing. I favour MidiShare, because its older, well-proven,
> cross-platform, and well and truly tested by its developers. I
> cannot say that for the MIDI parts of ALSA. I never thought that
> MIDI should've been treated the way it was in ALSA, either.
well, there are lots of things about ALSA that would be done differently
if it was done again. i for one would immediately copy CoreAudio's
abandonment of interrupts as as source of anything more than
information, and use a DLL instead. i am sure MIDI could be overhauled
in many ways too.
> >this will probably never be solved. if you look at the windows world,
> >there are several MIDI APIs in place, just as there are several audio
> >APIs in place. on OS X, there is only one, but CoreMIDI has been the
> >weakest received part of the whole CoreAudio-related package as far as I
> >can tell, and although it appears capable of a lot, it certainly can't
> >do what Rewire and/or JACK-midi can in terms of synchronizing MIDI with
> >audio at the sample level.
>
> MidiShare can, though ..
>
How?
Received on Mon Jun 13 16:15:16 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jun 13 2005 - 16:15:16 EEST