On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Owen Williams <owilli...@mixxx.org> wrote: > As the number of inputs and outputs increases, and as we re-add effects > to the pipeline, is our audio backend going to be flexible enough? How > many individual use cases do we need to support before we decide we have > to write some sort of generic JACK-style audio pipeline with sinks, > sources, and a cool graphical node-based patch bay? >
The backend is much more flexible than it looks at this moment due to limitations of the preferences, but it incapable of full patch bay functionality. Although I'm not sure that code that might, for example, pipe buffers through effects belongs in the same place as code that's only responsible for ushering data from sound card(s) to various places in Mixxx. It seems like a decent divide to have. > It does sound like this way of solving the problem is more nicely > generic than the member boolean or CO methods. > I'm not arguing against this, I was just looking to provide a quick solution that didn't involve joining EngineMaster and SoundManager at the hip. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Get Mixxx, the #1 Free MP3 DJ Mixing software Today http://mixxx.org Mixxx-devel mailing list Mixxx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mixxx-devel
