Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread Steve Harris
On 28 Nov 2007, at 00:05, Marc-Olivier Barre wrote: On Nov 27, 2007 11:24 PM, Dave Robillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have said this a lot, and I will continue saying it more until the end of time because it's important: the fact that ports can contain /anything/ is the fundamental

Re: [LAD] portmidi and alsa

2007-11-28 Thread Eric Dantan Rzewnicki
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 02:40:29PM +0100, Clemens Ladisch wrote: Dave Phillips wrote: Clemens Ladisch wrote: Portmidi designed is based on Windows' MME API which doesn't allow applications to create ports visible to other applications. Ah, that's good to know. Is that true for

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread Lars Luthman
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 10:47 +, Krzysztof Foltman wrote: I already gave you one example how it can be handled beyond what SysEx offers (by using interfaces). And another (by binding command numbers to URIs, preferably on plugin load). Read my previous mail more carefully. Using a number -

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread Krzysztof Foltman
Lars Luthman wrote: Using a number - URI mapping host feature is a good idea. With one byte for the event type in each event header you get 256 different types per plugin instance which is probably more than enough. With two bytes you get 65536 different types per plugin instance which is

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread David Olofson
On Wednesday 28 November 2007, Krzysztof Foltman wrote: [...] I don't think it's a serious problem. Huge processing buffers are not very useful in practice. [...] Actually, they're directly harmful most of the time! For any graph with more than one plugin, and with plugins that use internal

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread David Olofson
On Wednesday 28 November 2007, Krzysztof Foltman wrote: [...] - or introducing a 65536 samples milestone kind of event similar to clear message in LZ compression format, separating events from different 65536-sample eras :) Why would you need to do this? Timestamps in Audiality 0.1.x are 16

Re: [LAD] Ladspa plugin invisible

2007-11-28 Thread Lars Luthman
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 18:39 +0100, Rémi Thébault wrote: By the way, for the moment I use FFTW for the frequency identification. Is there a way to identify a frequency with quite high precision without computing a big spectrum analysis ? For a 0.7 Hz precision with fft, I need 65536 samples,

Re: [LAD] Ladspa plugin invisible

2007-11-28 Thread Florian Schmidt
On Wednesday 28 November 2007, Rémi Thébault wrote: By the way, for the moment I use FFTW for the frequency identification. Is there a way to identify a frequency with quite high precision without computing a big spectrum analysis ? For a 0.7 Hz precision with fft, I need 65536 samples, what

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread David Olofson
On Wednesday 28 November 2007, Dave Robillard wrote: [...] The only problem that needs to be handled is how to get the type in there. I would like to find a good solution to this problem that's as extensible as URIs but doesn't actually stick a URI in the event struct (there are a few other

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread Lars Luthman
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 16:45 +, Krzysztof Foltman wrote: There is also a possible middle ground - an event type declaration in rdf would say not just what URI it corresponds to, but also if it contains any unsafe data (like pointers, handles etc). Just to possibly prevent a hypothetical

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread Dave Robillard
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 23:39 +0100, David Olofson wrote: On Wednesday 28 November 2007, Dave Robillard wrote: [...] The only problem that needs to be handled is how to get the type in there. I would like to find a good solution to this problem that's as extensible as URIs but doesn't

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread Dan Mills
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 19:07 -0500, Dave Robillard wrote: Same with LV2 ports; works perfectly for port types. Problem is, sticking a URI in each /event/ is far too bloated/slow. I am coming horribly late to this discussion, so I might be being thick, but what happens if each event

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread David Olofson
On Thursday 29 November 2007, Dave Robillard wrote: [...] Same with LV2 ports; works perfectly for port types. Problem is, sticking a URI in each /event/ is far too bloated/slow. That's why I'm using a Port as the smallest connection unit, much like LADSPA ports, so there is no need for an

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread David Olofson
On Thursday 29 November 2007, Dave Robillard wrote: [...] Well, sure, but big data is big data. In the typical case plugin buffers are much smaller than the cache [...] Of course, but that's exactly what I'm talking about - large buffers, and why it doesn't make sense to support them. :-) If

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread Nedko Arnaudov
Lars Luthman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: struct Event_Port_Buffer { uint32_t capacity;// number of elements in the array uint32_t used_size; // number of _used_ elements uint32_t event_count; // number of events (different from

Re: [LAD] enhanced event port LV2 extension proposal

2007-11-28 Thread Nedko Arnaudov
Dan Mills [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now here is the trick, we convert that to a unique identifier at run time by registering each unique event URI as a string in some data structure (Map, linked list of parameters, whatever), then at event creation time we set the pointer to point to our