(cut) >I'm afraid i didnt make myself clear. I tried to expain this in >previous mails, but I think i'm failing so far. >I perfectly understand what JACK is, but as I said before, >it's primarily meant for low latency stuff. >So my proposal consisted in two things.
>1-The first one is to proovide transparent audio routing using >_existing apis_, this does work since most apps do proovide >standard buffersizes (100/200) ms latency. (As fun as this sounds, >many VST/DXi plugins work at these rates using the "windows kernel >streaming" hehe :). How would you provide an existing API ?! So, you have this existing API, and then ? You go and change the internals ?? Do you want to change the semantics of an existing API or what ? What do you do with existing code that uses this API and relies on its semantics ? Unless you can specify *in code* what you mean by this, I qualify this idea as a load of male cow excrement. Sorry for being harsh, I will happily clean up after myself if you get to prove your point. This is not a call for a flame war. Sometimes being loud and using an angry tone has much more potential of "bringing the message". >2-I also DO aknowledge a _new_ API for doing this low latency, JACK >works perfect for this. I've never said it doesnt. When I said that >JACK should become part of Alsa-lib i've meant that jack could go in a >lower layer than it currently goes (maybe a driver level or >something?) so it can capture and automatically "jackify" the data >from existing apps that use the native api (alsa/oss emulation). >The stream doesnt need to go "low latency" (and from what I know JACK >should support normal latency apps fine) but you can still route >existing apps and share the the device. >How realistic do you think this approach is? What is the point in a lower layer ? There is clearly some lower layer fallacy. Just like people go "ooh" when you put something inside the kernel, instead of in userspace. There is *no point* in doing stuff lowlevel if you can do it highlevel, with more comprehensive code (and less chance to fsck up). Ok, I'm wishing to give you some credit here. I think you have some point I do not get. Suppose I give you a fully working API with the implementation of some form. What do you want to do with it. What do you mean by pushing it to a lower layer ?? Also note that this is Linux Audio _Dev_ I really look forward to hearing valid points from a developers point of view from what you have been suggesting. best regards, Vincent
