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

On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 14:09 -0500, Dave Robillard wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 16:21 +0200, Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
> > 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;
> > > };
>
> Might as well break the time stamp into two separate uint16_t's and make
> life easy.

Agreed. Most plugins won't care about the fractional part. The only
drawback I can think of is that on a platform that aligns struct members
to 32 bits you won't be able to load the complete timestamp as a
uint32_t without some shifting and |ing, but that will probably be a
special case anyway. Having the timestamp as two separate members makes
everything completely self-documented.

> Please, please let this silly 'type of the data member' angle of
> conversation die... :)
>
> Hereby humbly requesting that:
>
> // data follows here
>
> be the last thing in the event struct for the purposes of this
> conversation, since it's irrelevant and not a point of debate

Agreed.

--ll

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