Thanx, I'll look at the solution. Gerald On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 18:52 +0000, Chris Cannam wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 6:40 PM, gerald mwangi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, has someone looked at the code? I really need an answer to the question. > > Sorry, I didn't notice this earlier on LAD because the subject line > ("Is TerminatorX development stalled?") bore no relationship to the > substance of the query. No slight to TerminatorX intended, but I > wouldn't normally look at messages on LAD about it! > > > I have a question to for the devs out there though: It seems to me that i > > have to run process() a few times with a fixed blocksize before, > > getRequiredSamples() returns something >0 in Realtime-mode. All other > > options are default options. Is this true? > > You have to supply process() with a certain amount of data before > anything becomes available at output, yes. If you are using a small > fixed block size, then yes it is true that you will likely have to > call process() several times. You might like to consider querying > getLatency() first, after setting the initial ratios, and "priming" > the stretcher with that number of zeroed samples before you start. > > > Chris
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
