Whoops... On Mon, 2010-11-08 at 18:53 +0200, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > If that makes you happy I'll do the change, but this is clearly a > > wrong interpretation. You want to infer the length of a frame in ms by > > dividing the sampling rate by the number of sample points... > > Yes, but "number of samples" doesn't unambiguously refer to "number of > sample points" Sorry, this is not a finished sentence. I accidentally sent the message when I was not done yet. I'll send another mail soon. -- Tanu
