Subject: Re: Ideas on the audio framework
To: None <tech-kern@NetBSD.org>
From: Eric Haszlakiewicz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/12/2004 20:44:17
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 04:19:22PM -0600, David Young wrote:
> We are 95% agreed. The 5% where we disagree is whether or not the
> volume resolution is a limitation that can be hidden. If you hide that
> information, you don't make the application's job any easier, and you
> foreclose certain possibilities.
Actually, you _do_ make the application's job easier because it
doesn't need to keep state.
What are these "certain possibilities" that you are talking about?
As long as it is possible for an app to figure out what a meaningful
volume step is, I don't see what keeping state in the kernel could
prevent you from doing. It currently _is_ possible to figure out
the hardware step: mixerctl -w outputs.master++ works. I don't think
anyone is proposing removing that feature.
Things that I can think an app would want to do with volume:
set volume to level X
increase/decrease the volume by one step
increase/decrease the volumn by one meaningful step
All of these are possible with a stateful volume control.
What else can you do with a volume knob?