Florian Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 11:52:44 +0200 > Mario Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Reusability of code is a quite valid point, and I thought the OP's >> question was quite interesting. >> >> We shouldn't define ourselves in terms of what windows does. Frankly, I >> don't >> care anymore, its now 8 years since I switched to Linux completely. >> >> libmidifile would be cute, is any of the existing codebases flexible >> enough so that it could be massaged into a nice lib? > > vote++ to everything you said. dunno about any existing midi code though > flexible enough to be put into a lib.. After taking a glance at > rosegarden and muse's source it seems there's always app specifics > intertwined.
Sure, *because* there wasn't a standard midifile library around in the first place, they all hacked it into the program directly, therefore it is intertwined :-). > Wasn't a midi file pretty much a simple dump of midi events anyways? That is mostly true for type 0 files, but type 1 (and especially 2) is a bit more involved. And of course, there are the SMF meta events. -- CYa, Mario