15 Nov
2009
15 Nov
'09
5:03 a.m.
fons(a)kokkinizita.net:
...
OSC does two things:
1. It encodes packet type in textual strings, which
can be structured in the same way as pathnames in
file system are.
2. It defines a way to describe and encode the data that
follows, so you are not limited to a set of predefined
formats.
Both are done in a way that make the conversion from/to
a textual representation very simple, which is some
cases is a desirable feature.
As an unix guy, I'd skip the encoding and send the whole thing as
space separaed text, since then you could simply do a telnet to the
other host and run it by hand. Compare e.g. to smtp.
The performance loss of printf() and scanf() at sending/receiving
sides are minimal, and plain text is much easier to debug.
But, this is of cause moot, since OSC is already there.
...
And anyway, until the fundamental hardware design
issues
are solved, all this is in fact quite irrelevant.
I see no problem of simulating this on one "master" pc and "two"
slaves, and there is only the low cpu performance that is specific to
the embedded controller. The protocols can be developed on ordinary
pc's with their on-the-motherboard sound cards. And hopefully the
netjack people solves it for us.
Regards,
/Karl
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Hammar Aspö Data karl(a)aspodata.se
Lilla Aspö 148 Networks
S-742 94 Östhammar +46 173 140 57 Computers
Sweden +46 70 511 97 84 Consulting
-----------------------------------------------------------------------