On Sun, 2010-11-07 at 18:37 -0600, pl bossart wrote: > > So, how about renaming this array to pcm_frames_per_mpeg_frame? > > 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". I don't know any better term for the set of values generated at a sample point than "(pcm) frame". Of course, we could call the set of values generated at a sampling point a "samples", and the per-channel sample something else, but I don't have any good ideas what the name could be for the per-channel sample. Maybe "pcm frame" isn't entirely correct terminology in this case, but isn't it still obviously clear what pcm_frames_per_mpeg_frame means? The frame is anyway decoded into pcm data at some point... -- Tanu
