[LAD] "enhanced event port" LV2 extension proposal

David Olofson david at olofson.net
Fri Nov 30 02:15:35 UTC 2007

On Friday 30 November 2007, Dave Robillard wrote:
> I do agree we should not be adding crufty features to support
> massive buffers, if that's what you mean.  It's easier to just split
> the cycle anyway.

Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Sure, one *could* have a use for 
really huge buffers (say, running large FFTs without intermediate 
buffering), but to me, that seems too far out that one should have 
everyone deal with 32:32 event timestamps for that reason alone.

[...cache footprint, buffers etc...]
> A clever host can just use the same, say, 2 buffers (stereo audio),

I'm assuming any serious host implementation does that, but that 
doesn't help when some plugins are using more than 1-2 audio inputs. 
Even so, it shouldn't really be an issue unless huge buffers - like 
>=65536 samples - are used.

//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate

.-------  http://olofson.net - Games, SDL examples  -------.
|        http://zeespace.net - 2.5D rendering engine       |
|       http://audiality.org - Music/audio engine          |
|     http://eel.olofson.net - Real time scripting         |
'--  http://www.reologica.se - Rheology instrumentation  --'

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list