Re: This criticism of jackd valid?

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

 



On Sunday 21 January 2007 22:21, Esben Stien wrote:
> Florian Schmidt <mista.tapas@xxxxxxx> writes:
> > Is there some concensus that such functionality has a place in
> > libjack?
>
> I don't understand this. Why care about the JACK buffer?. Why not just
> buffer a little before?, especially with a media player.

Well, in this case the media player has to do all the decoupling from jack, 
which, while not terribly complicated, does have some pitfalls.. 

If you simply say: "jack, give me a 0.5 sec buffer" you can get away with 
quite a bit of non-rt programming, because a 0.5 sec deadline is rather easy 
to meet (maybe the need to prebuffer in the media player is gone completely).

It's about making jack easier to use for application programmers, that do no 
care for quick response times (a realtime effect processor would care, as 
would a softsynth, but my media player doesn't).

In the world of audio applications there are quite a few usecases where 
latency is not that much of an issue. Those apps should be able to happily 
coexist in a jack graph with low latency apps. And as there are quite a few 
of these apps, the problem should be solved once and not by every app writer 
again and again..

A blocking interface like in libjackasyn, which partly solves this problem 
afaict, would be a nice feature, too..

Regards,
Flo

-- 
Palimm Palimm!
http://tapas.affenbande.org

[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