Re: [LAD] "enhanced event port" LV2 extension proposal

From: Dave Robillard <drobilla@email-addr-hidden>
Date: Fri Nov 30 2007 - 01:49:37 EET

On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 09:19 +0000, Krzysztof Foltman wrote:
> Lars Luthman wrote:
>
> > _Any_ structure that isn't just a dumb array of bytes will be unsafe to
> > move between machines because of endianness.
>
> A bridge can compare the architectures of the bridged machines, and
> refuse to continue if they're different.
>
> That kind of bridge could be written by a well trained chimpanzee and
> work for (perhaps) majority of cases. Of course, to work for *all*
> cases, the serialization would be needed.
>
> Also, if the buffer is "simple" (as in: no pointers or handles
> whatsoever), the serialization doesn't need to be implemented or invoked! :)

Serialisation (be it for a network or to a file or whatever) is an event
type specific thing; orthogonal problem. OSC, for example, precisely
defines the binary format of a message for network transmission.

New event type extensions can define such things on their own as well.

-DR-

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Fri Nov 30 04:15:03 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 30 2007 - 04:15:03 EET