On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 05:12, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > The only disadvantage I see in the above scheme is that there is some
> > duplication of code between PortAudio and gstreamer. But this seems
> > irreconcilable; GStreamer isn't useful for Multimedia-editing
> > applications (
Hi,
> The only disadvantage I see in the above scheme is that there is some
> duplication of code between PortAudio and gstreamer. But this seems
> irreconcilable; GStreamer isn't useful for Multimedia-editing
> applications (unless they were built from the ground up to use it), and
> I doubt GSt
>
>Paul: (2) above may make you nervous, but look at it this way. You have
>said in the past that every Mac OS X application is capable of
>interchanging audio data out of the box, thanks to CoreAudio. The flip
>side of that coin is that CoreAudio was written to be usable by every
>application e
The next version of PortAudio supports blocking read/write for host apis
that support it directly:
http://www.portaudio.com/docs/proposals/005-BlockingReadWriteInterface.html
In my opinion, CSL is redundant in the face of PortAudio; PortAudio is
more mature, both in interface and implementation (
Hi!
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 06:21:20PM +0100, Jozef Kosoru wrote:
> Well, AFAIK the current CSL implementation is rather poor. There is
> aRts and OSS output only (not even ALSA!) and no pluginable interface
> yet.
Well, you're right. CSL is not complete, and probably will not be for some
time
Hi!
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 12:39:29PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
> >No. PortAudio makes a lot of choices for the software developer, and thus
> >provides an easy abstraction.
>
> The point is that PortAudio follows the same basic abstraction that
> the audio APIs on the overwhelmingly dominant
Original Message -
From: "Paul Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, 27 February, 2003 18:39
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Fwd: CSL Motivation (fwd)
> well, there are at least two sets of evidence to consider ther
>designed to achieve a certain purpose. From the PortAudio homepage:
>
>| PortAudio is intended to promote the exchange of audio synthesis software
>| between developers on different platforms, and was recently selected as the
>| audio component of a larger PortMusic project that includes MIDI and
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 05:21:10PM +0100, Stefan Westerfeld wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 07:48:11PM +0200, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 12:20:22 -0500
> > From: Paul Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [linux-aud
Hi!
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 07:48:11PM +0200, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 12:20:22 -0500
> From: Paul Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Fwd: CSL Motivation
>
> >There are discussions on kde-multime
10 matches
Mail list logo
