On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 10:33 PM, M Donalies ingeniousnebb...@cox.net wrote:
The first question is a rather stupid one: How long is a Jack frame? If we're
running at 44.1 kHz, is a frame 1/44100 sec? Or is it some multiple? Or is it
something else? And does the process callback get called at
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 3:57 AM, M Donalies ingeniousnebb...@cox.netwrote:
No locks or mutexes in a callback function. I need to think about that one.
This is indeed a lovely topic for debate. I'm bound to say that, I'm
currently doing a final-year project for college on the topic.
I've came up
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Harry van Haaren
harryhaa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 3:57 AM, M Donalies ingeniousnebb...@cox.net
wrote:
No locks or mutexes in a callback function. I need to think about that
one.
This is indeed a lovely topic for debate. I'm bound to say
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Paul Coccoli pcocc...@gmail.com wrote:
This scheme sounds error prone. In general, copying C++ objects via
memcpy (or writing them 1 byte at a time into the ringbuffer, which is
what I think you're proposing) is a bad idea.
Nope, write them one sizeof(
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Paul Coccoli pcocc...@gmail.com wrote:
JACK ringbuffers are
ideally suited to passing simple types (like floats), and not vairable
sized things (like different derived Event classes). Your enum for
event types is a bit of a red flag, too. While its perfectly
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Harry van Haaren harryhaa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Paul Coccoli pcocc...@gmail.com wrote:
This scheme sounds error prone. In general, copying C++ objects via
memcpy (or writing them 1 byte at a time into the ringbuffer, which is
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Harry van Haaren harryhaa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Paul Coccoli pcocc...@gmail.com wrote:
JACK ringbuffers are
ideally suited to passing simple types (like floats), and not vairable
sized things (like different derived Event
