On Sunday 08 December 2002 12.11, Tim Hockin wrote: > > > Uggh, can we keep the get() of control values simpler than > > > events? My previos proposal had a control->get() method and a > > > ctrl->set() method. Obviously, the set() is superceded by > > > events. Is the get, too? > > > > What is this for? If you want to implement this then they need to > > be events (well, sample accurate), but they sound like a pain to > > implement. > > Well, my first thought is that we don;t want to send a CTRL_CHANGE > event to the host every time a control changes,
Why not? Just like the host isn't supposed to flood the system with events, neither are you, as an event generating plugin. (And there's a reason why some APIs have ramp events and the like.) > Do we want the > host to have to send CTRL_GET events and wait for CTRL_VALUE > events, or can we say 'one tick granularity is all the host can > get' wrt CTRL_GET? Well, either could work... I don't see any major advantages with either, except that the event based approach can be made sample accurate with minimal effort. (Copy the timestamp field. In fact, the way I do events in Audiality, you can even reuse the event struct of the request, rather than throwing it away and allocating a new one for the reply.) //David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate .- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------. | Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. | | RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. | `---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -' .- M A I A -------------------------------------------------. | The Multimedia Application Integration Architecture | `----------------------------> http://www.linuxdj.com/maia -' --- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---
