linuxaudio.org

On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 03:45:31PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> hint: the patch to add a new port type to JACK will involve on the

quoted text
> same order of magnitude number of characters as have already been used

> in this email thread.

Indeed. But why should anyone submit a patch for an idea that

has already been rejected, in particular if the rejection was

motivated in a way that implicitly condones crappy programming

instead of criticizing it ? What sort of excellence can you

expect if things are decided in that way ? (1)
Don't take this personally, but I've had enough of this sort

of negative argumentation for some time. I do remember the LV2

discussions (2), the Jack session ones, and some others. And

the result is that I go my own way, even if that leads to a

loss of synergy and benefit for all.
(1) Mediocrity.

(2) The real gem in that case was a remark that representing

the sample rate as a ratio would lead to inefficiency as it

required a (1, one) division.
Ciao,
--

FA
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

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