[LAD] "enhanced event port" LV2 extension proposal

[Dave Robillard]

On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 19:32 +0100, David Olofson wrote:
> On Saturday 01 December 2007, Dave Robillard wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 11:23 +0100, David Olofson wrote:
> > > On Friday 30 November 2007, Krzysztof Foltman wrote:
> > > [...several points that I totally agree with...]
> > > > If you use integers, perhaps the timestamps should be stored as
> > > > delta values. 
> > > 
> > > That would seem to add complexity with little gain, though I
> > > haven't really thought hard about that...
> > 
> > It does have the significant advantage of eliminating the hard upper
> > bound on the range of time that can be present in a buffer (and with
> > 'null' events, eliminates any such limit entirely, ala SMF). More 
> > annoying to work with though..
> 
> Yeah; someone has to add the "null" events, and the delta nature of 
> it, obviously. You could hide that in event handling 
> calls/macros/inlines of course, but still...

Yeah, unless there's some compelling cases where splitting the cycle has
a negative side effect, not worth it.

-DR-