On Friday 30 November 2007, Dave Robillard wrote: [...] > I do agree we should not be adding crufty features to support > massive buffers, if that's what you mean. It's easier to just split > the cycle anyway.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Sure, one *could* have a use for really huge buffers (say, running large FFTs without intermediate buffering), but to me, that seems too far out that one should have everyone deal with 32:32 event timestamps for that reason alone. [...cache footprint, buffers etc...] > A clever host can just use the same, say, 2 buffers (stereo audio), I'm assuming any serious host implementation does that, but that doesn't help when some plugins are using more than 1-2 audio inputs. Even so, it shouldn't really be an issue unless huge buffers - like >=65536 samples - are used. //David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate .------- http://olofson.net - Games, SDL examples -------. | http://zeespace.net - 2.5D rendering engine | | http://audiality.org - Music/audio engine | | http://eel.olofson.net - Real time scripting | '-- http://www.reologica.se - Rheology instrumentation --' _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
