On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 19:51 -0500, Jack O'Quin wrote: > On 5/9/07, Dave Robillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Regarding the one sensible thing you /have/ said: is sample rate as a > > double sufficient, or is there a good reason for numerator/denominator > > (that outweighs the PITA for the plugin author)? > > I'll play "dumb user" on this one... > > Are there useful sample rates that can be expressed more accurately > with a pair of 32-bit integers than by a double? > > If so, programmers who don't care about the extra accuracy could > presumably convert the ratio to a double in one line of code (at the > cost of a single division operation). That does not seem excessive, > assuming there are real-world examples where the extra accuracy > would help. Are there any?
The only thing I can think of is if a plugin is doing resampley things and works with wav files. If your sample rate is 48000/44100 and your wav file is 44100.. well, you know /something/ you wouldn't know if it was a double I guess. I can't think of any case where that 'something' would actually be useful though, it's always going to get converted to a double anyway. Fons? -DR- _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev
