>my afraid is that the more control flows like conditionals may lead to >a difficulty for a parser utility. i.e. the parser itself would be >like an interprerter. but it's true that an extesion is needed >anyway...
with a smile, i seem to recall noting that we'd end up with lisp. quasimodo had gone through the same song and dance with a custom configuration parser only to eventually find that guile made more sense in almost every way. there is some adage about reinventing lisp that i forget. >IMO, the current simple-mixer API is still too complicated and not a >good abstraction. as you mentioned, there is a big gap between the >low-level expressions (control API) and the reasonable mixer >appearance. the extra information for the mixer would be needed to >fill this gap, too. i'd like to put in a plug for a API that includes the one basic operation that JACK cannot implement on "generic" hardware: "make the signal coming to the current capture input appear at the output". i.e. hardware monitoring. this is a really major flaw in JACK when run on all consumer audio interfaces: they are quite capable of doing analog-level h/w monitoring, but JACK can't use it. i know that the semantics need to be better defined than in my sentence above. --p ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel