On 13 Aug 2009, at 18:10, David Robillard wrote: > On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 10:08 +0100, james morris wrote: >> I was trying to point to the question of: Why base the replication >> of a >> control port on the replication of the audio ports? The audio port >> replication is based on the number of channels, so base the >> replication >> of the control port (if it is to be replicated) on that also. > > ... the audio port replication IS the "number of channels". > >> So we have two new port properties: one to say this port should >> always be >> replicated - audio ports would use this - and another to say that >> this >> port can be replicated but does not have to be. The matching of >> counts >> is implied because there's no sane reason why port replication counts >> would not match. > > You are (falsely) assuming the replication is the same across the > entire > plugin. i.e. there is no global "number of channels" value
Ah. I see. I thought that the proposal for that the number of channels in each port would be 1 or N. In that case, I object to the proposal on the basis of over complexity, and trying to solve a problem we don't actually have. - Steve _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
