Subject: Re: Ideas on the audio framework
To: None <tech-kern@NetBSD.org>
From: David Young <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/07/2004 00:51:57
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 07:29:36AM +0200, Jukka Marin wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 09:01:06PM -0600, David Young wrote:
> > Please, fix the applications! A user should not have to "hunt" on a
> > dial with 256 settings for the 16 settings that matter. Neither should
> > a computer program.
> The applications should never need to know the hardware details. The
> current implementation of broken, IMNSHO.
> Or do think every single programm running under X should handle different
> screen depths, resultions, gfx accelerators, monitor types etc. by itself?
> I think it's the job of X and the display drivers to do that. I also think
> it's the job of the audio drivers to hide the hardware differences as much
> as possible.
Jukka, what is it about the broken implementation that is broken?
I may not disagree with you that it is broken. There was a discussion
about some god-awful stateful implementation---I don't remember how that
We disagree that the way to fix it is with scaling. The way to fix it
is to tell apps, "I am a volume control. I am adjustable in the range
[0, hwmax]. I will clamp settings greater than hwmax or less than 0."
Let the apps decide whether to scale or to provide discrete settings,
but do *not* make them represent that there are more settings than there
really are, and then conceal the dismal truth from them.
(BTW, X provides descriptions of the graphics hardware capabilities to
apps that are *much* richer than the volume-control interface I describe.)
David Young OJC Technologies
email@example.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933