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

Krzysztof Foltman <wdev@email-addr-hidden> writes:

> Lars Luthman wrote:
>
>> non-standard hacks in a specification. But with the current event header
>> proposal we don't have a pointer _or_ a flexible array member in it, so
>> this discussion is sort of pointless.
>
> So, basically, we have a choice between:
>
> struct LV2_EVENT_HEADER_LLKF
> {
> uint32_t timestamp; // 16:16
> uint16_t payload_size;
> uint16_t event_type;
> };
>
> struct LV2_EVENT_TYPE_X
> {
> LV2_EVENT_HEADER_LLKF hdr;
> // type X-specific data here (be it a pointer, or in-place data, or
> whatever)
> // size must be an integer multiple of 8 bytes
> };
>
> and different variants of:
>
> struct LV2_EVENT_HEADER_DR
> {
> float_or_double timestamp;
> some_int_type2 payload_size;
> some_int_type event_type;
> // pointer to data or inline data array here
> };
>
> which - I believe - Dave seems to favour.

I like header variant (no payload specified directly) with (8 byte)
alignment. It is better than specifying N byte payload as array. Also it
is both C and C++ friendly.

-- 
Nedko Arnaudov <GnuPG KeyID: DE1716B0>

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev