Re: Jack 1 vs. 2

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2/5/21 10:54 AM, Filipe Coelho wrote:
On 05/02/21 10:41, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
The essential changes also exposed a lot of very inefficient algorithms. For example, if you make a new connection between two
clients that are already connected then there is no need to
recompute the running order, but it was done anyway just because
the existing logic required it. It doesn't matter if you have just
a few clients with a few ports. But this doesn't scale well to
bigger systems. So I decided to fix that at the same time. That's
probably why the patch was rejected.

[...]

It turns out the end result did not work well, so it had to be
reverted [3]

> [3] https://github.com/jackaudio/jack1/commit/ea78c7e06e768a02d6129c43c51473a7f94cfd73

IIRC, Fons' "topological sort" patch was reverted just because the end result were **audibly** worse that not, for most "normal" situations.

It wasn't quite about code style... you could actually **hear** the
damage to your ears! :)

cheers
--
rncbc aka. Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Sound]     [ALSA Users]     [Pulse Audio]     [ALSA Devel]     [Sox Users]     [Linux Media]     [Kernel]     [Photo Sharing]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux