Re: asihpi: Control naming

["Sebastian H." <vand2@gmx.de>]

Am 01.10.2010 09:05, schrieb Clemens Ladisch:
> Sebastian H. wrote:
>> In alsamixer-qt4 I've just stumbled over enum elements for which both
>> snd_mixer_selem_is_enum_playback and
>> snd_mixer_selem_is_enum_capture
>> return 0/false (2.6.32 kernel emu10k1 chip).
>>
>> May I drop the question in if this state can be considered valid
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> and besides *playback* and *capture* elements there's a third group of
>> *neutral* elements?
> 
> Those are elements where the simple mixer code doesn't know the
> direction (because the driver author didn't put "Playback" or "Capture"
> into the name).

Ok, but I wonder how to interpret this state in which both functions
return zero.

1) There's a bug or uncertainty somewhere in the libs/driver and
in a perfekt world this would not happen. It always should be either.

2) This is intentional and the respective element belongs to the
group of *general* elements which exists in parallel
to the *playback* and the *capture* element groups.

As mentioned alsamixer-qt4 considers 1) and handles it somehow
gracefully. I just wonder if that is the correct thing to do in case.