From: Jonathan W. <jw...@ph...> - 2008-04-15 00:42:03
|
Hi Francois > First, just to say you did a fantastic work! Thanks. :-) > What do you plan for adapting it to each model? I have a number of ideas that I'm mulling over. Obviously my highest priority is to complete this proof-of-concept phase which I should be able to do within the next week. The outcome of that will probably shape the adaptive work to a certain extent. > The definition file we didn't do for port definition in motu_avdevice.cpp > should be useful now. Yes and no. What we've got now is reasonable, gets the job done and at the end of the day didn't take all that long to implement. If a separate definition file turns out to be the way to go I don't think we've really lost anything. > We could have an XML definition file that could be used by motu_avdevice and > mixer_motu. That way the port definition code wouldn't be duplicated in C > and python. The elimination of as much duplication as possible is one thing I'm pondering in the back of my mind. However, there is unfortunately more to it than just the port definitions when it comes to integrating it with ffadomixer. Given that I have a number of ideas flying around my head at present I'm not certain that something as "heavy-weight" as XML is justifiable here. However, it's early days. > I'm a volunteer to do it if you're ok. I'd probably rather that this wait at least until I've finished the current testing phase. By that point I should also have consolidated my ideas about going forward to a point where I can actually discuss them with others in a coherent way. :-) Thanks for volunteering - watch this space. Regards jonathan |