Re: [Linuxsampler-devel] Suupporting various sample library formats and engines

[Steve H. <S.W...@ec...>]

On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 10:27:49 +0100, Matthias Weiss wrote:
> > Of course, the counter argument too all this is that writing a full
> > sampler engine for every format we want to support fully sucks, no-one
> > probably needs all that functionlaity anyway, and we should just write
> > translators ont a common, comprehensive format and live with the slight
> > conversion loss. <shrug>
> 
> In order to provide the whole features that a sample format provides, we
> have to represent the parameters in linuxsampler. But that means we
> allready have a "grand unified sample" system.

We dont have to do that, we can have format specific engines, the question
is whether its a good idea or not.

Benno's plan to use dynamic compilation units would make the engines quick
to construct, they won't be as fast as ticghtly hand coded engines, but it
may be worth it for the RAD features.

- Steve