Re: Another asinine question

[Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <jcastro@instant.com.br>]

Takashi Iwai wrote:

>>>>Another thing: you'll see I just "hung" another snd_pcm_file_t structure at the bottom of the original one. I'll understand if that offends people's coding sensibilities -- it offended mine. :-/
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Does't only one file descriptor instead of the whole snd_pcm_file struct suffice?  Actually, it's used only in readi().
>>>      
>>>
>>Not really, especially when I finally tackle _readn. And even in the noninterleaved case, there's always the possibility read() will return a number of bytes that's not a multiple of the frame size (especially if the file is a named pipe). I'll need ->wbuf and some of those indexes to keep the remaining bytes for the next read.
>>    
>>
>Then let's create another object type.  It's confusing to use the existing object for completly another purpose.
>
>Also, "nextfile" doesn't sound intuitive in this case.  (it sounds like a linked chain of data.)
>  
>
Agree and agree. I DID say it was offensive. In my defense, boss was 
swinging the whip and I had to churn out code rather quickly. OK, that 
was a lame excuse. :-/

For the noninterleaved case, I think a plain dumb byte FIFO (buffer, 
head, tail) would be enough. I'll only be able to code on that tomorrow 
-- got an unrelated deadline to meet today.

Juan


-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642