Rick Burnett wrote:
>
> I have been following this discussion and also agree that I do not see
> the advantage of implementing a multitude of internal sample handling
> data types. It just seems to me that doing this would cause
> compatibility problems between plugins even if conversions occur. If
> 95% of the application are going to use floats, then it only seems
> reasonable that you would want to cater to the majority because
No, NO... I'm not proposing to *implement* it, but to have a *chance* to
support it (for special needs) to have a general enough model.
Remember: an hardware PCM *is* a soundbox and no hardware PCM known
handle float.
> 1. The API will be easier to understand and use, less worrying about
> implementing for multiple data-types or worrying about conversion.
No conversion, no difficulties, only
soundbox_port_set_property(port, SOUNDBOX_PORT_PROPERTY_FORMAT, FLOAT32)
Note that soundbox don't need to be able to handle INT32 or INT16: if it
does not support them a different soundbox_port_set_property from that
above would fail.
Really, I can't understand what do you have against a flexibility that
has no cost.
--
Abramo Bagnara mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Opera Unica Phone: +39.546.656023
Via Emilia Interna, 140
48014 Castel Bolognese (RA) - Italy
ALSA project http://www.alsa-project.org
It sounds good!
