Re: [LAD] tschack ... early version of smp enabled jack1

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 07:38:38AM -0800, James Warden wrote:
>
>
> --- On Tue, 1/26/10, Chris Cannam <cannam@email-addr-hidden-day-breakfast.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Chris Cannam <cannam@email-addr-hidden-day-breakfast.com>
> > Subject: Re: [LAD] tschack ... early version of smp enabled jack1
> > To: "torbenh" <torbenh@email-addr-hidden>
> > Cc: linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
> > Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2010, 7:38 AM
> > On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 9:05 PM,
> > torbenh <torbenh@email-addr-hidden>
> > wrote:
> > > since i dont want to let jack1 codebase die in a
> > feature freeze,
> > > i added some features.
> > >
> > > - smp aware
> > > - clickless connections
> >
> > Is there any reason why a user would prefer this over
> > jack2?
> >
>
> and would I assume correctly that one of the reasons to not let the jack1 codebase "die" (or freeze) is that it is written in C as opposed to jack2 ?

no. i actually prefer C++
but not that much that i would deal with CamelCase and a class hierarchy
i find confusing. but thats just my taste.

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