Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > Is there anything inherently wrong with OSC as a _transport_ protocol? > Anything that makes it unsuitable for that purpose within the framework > of jack? (I know there have been threads about this before)
I second that. Why invent yet another protocol when there's already a kind of standard available? But, besides the lack of out-of-the-box semantics, there's another potential issue with OSC, namely that OSC packets can get arbitrarily large. That might be a problem with Jack. I don't know enough about Jack's internals to assess the impacts of this, but I imagine that a realtime-capable gc would be needed to deal with this. Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
