Re: [LAU] OT: Interesting article on MIDI timing

Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 15:42 -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Gordon JC Pearce <gordonjcp@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>>> Why the hell can't a 3.4GHz 64-bit processor do what the 6809 in my
>>> Ensoniq ESQ-1 can do?
>> its running (Windows|OSX|Linux|BSD|Solaris)
>>
>
> It's clocked at 3,400 times the speed, and is probably pushing over
> 10,000 times as many instructions. Surely it can sequence a semiquaver
> roll without it sounding like turnips being tipped off a truck?

I'm not sure about the OS that ran on those old Ataris, but I know that
on the Amiga OS, which had full preemptive multitasking, any task could
shut down that multitasking and grab the CPU all to itself with a single
call to the "Forbid" system call. Calling "Permit" handed the CPU back
to the scheduler.

I'm sure all hell would break loose today if modern OSs had something
like that, but it would certainly make some tasks -- like low-latency
MIDI processing -- a lot easier to implement :)

Thanks
Leigh

>
> Gordon MM0YEQ
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Fri Mar 12 04:15:02 2010