On 12 May 2007, at 22:58, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 20:35 +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
On 12 May 2007, at 10:52, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
Given the function f(a,b), where most people would only need to
bother
about f(a), we could do:
Ugh. I really don't like that. If the API mandates a num/denom, make
sure its propertly documented and people use it, otherwise it's a
waste of everyone's time, and it will never be possible to use it in
practice.
Ehrm, I think I said it should be documented in the man page, but
perhaps not in the skeleton demo aimed at people with a bright idea
they'd like to try out
People will copy the skeleton demo, so if it doesn't use the
denominator you may as well not have it.
I can only assume that Fons was joking when he said that, as he's so
concerned about compatibility.
You don't have to like it, actually most people (except for Fons?) can
just ignore it and move on with whatever it was that they were
doing ...
they can't /ignore/ it, they have to use it. I agree that it doesn't
have to be very taxing.
The cost of pushing one or a few extra more/less redundant
parameters on
the stack is /nada/ compared to the pointer arithmetics involved in
figuring out where the in and out buffers are located, and then start
shuffling data around and then, while we are at it, perhaps do
something
with the data as well?
The computational cost is vanishingly small.
- Steve
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev
