8 Dec
2002
8 Dec
'02
7:25 p.m.
On Sunday 08 December 2002 12.11, Tim Hockin wrote:
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.)
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 Obviously, the set() is superceded by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. 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 ---