On 26 May 2007, at 18:05, Dave Robillard wrote:
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 18:24 +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
On 11 May 2007, at 15:07, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 03:33:04PM +0200, Lars Luthman wrote:
That sounds like a good argument for two ints to me. Although
you'd have
to do a lot better than double if you wanted to represent
irrational
numbers in binary form. =)
Two 32-bit ints can represent (the non-integer part of) most (not
all)
irrational values to better precision than a double. The algo to
find
them is a bit mysterious but very simple. Simple example: 355/113 is
equal to pi with a relative error of less than 1e-7, not bad for two
3-digit numbers. It's not difficult to find two 32-bit ints that
would
be better than a double.
So, what's the verdict on this?
Don't want to fall into the perpetual beta with known issue trap, I'd
like to fix the sample rate issue and crank out another beta ASAP..
I'm skeptical we'd ever actually see a plugin that would use rational
sample rate, so I vote double unless:
- rational is required for perfect video sync over long time frames
- someone can provide a concrete example of a realistic plugin that
would require/benefit from rational
Agreed. And no-one has to my knowledge.
Multirate processing would require an extension, so that extension
may as well add the num/denom format for the sample rates as and when
it's needed.
- Steve
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev
