Subject: Re: [LAU] open hw soundcard

From: <fons@...> · Date: Saturday, November 14, 2009 - 10:54 pm

On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 10:31:00PM +0000, Folderol wrote:
> > And where do you get the 'quite significant overhead' ?

quoted text> > It just depends on how you use it.

>

> Well, maybe I'm wrong, but looking through the info I could find I got

> the impression there was a lot of identification stuff going on before

> you got anywhere near actual data.
Anywhere where packets of different types have to be transmitted

over the same channel you need to add some data to identify the

packet type. It can be a simple as a single byte or int.
OSC does two things:
1. It encodes packet type in textual strings, which

   can be structured in the same way as pathnames in

   file system are.
2. It defines a way to describe and encode the data that

   follows, so you are not limited to a set of predefined

   formats.
Both are done in a way that make the conversion from/to

a textual representation very simple, which is some

cases is a desirable feature. 
Neither of these is essential in the application we are

discussing, it could as well use a fixed set of binary

formats. If the limits of doing that are acceptable then

you don't need OSC or anything similar. If you don't want

such limitations then OSC is a good choice. That's all.
And anyway, until the fundamental hardware design issues

are solved, all this is in fact quite irrelevant.
Ciao,
--

FA
Io lo dico sempre: l'Italia è troppo stretta e lunga.
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user