[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[fluid-dev] Fluidsynth changes

From: Ebrahim Mayat
Subject: [fluid-dev] Fluidsynth changes
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:29:48 +0200

Three points:
Users of an OSS project are not necessarily what is known as "end users" i.e. people who only want to run an application and have no interest in how it is coded. In particular, the users I'm thinking of for my project are OSS coders who need an embeddable synthesizer for their own projects. I hope that by providing a smaller, more powerful, easier-to-use API, they will be better served.

Sounds good.

This is OSS. I'm a volunteer. I code because it's fun, not because I'm paid or because I hope to satisfy the expectations of certain people. I do hope that others will find my work useful, but if not even one person is interested in my code, or if for lack of time or interest I never finish my project, does it mean my project will have been a waste? Not in my eyes. I will have had fun while coding it, and (hopefully) I will have learned something.

Sure, I don't disagree with that.

Hopefully it will now be clear that the "use" I'm thinking of is actually of the libraries, by other coders, rather than by end users.

Okay, now you have clarified part of your intentions.

Have you also considered how code transparency might be affected?

Don't know what that means. If you mean ease of use of the API, then yes, I hope it will be improved.

At the moment, it looks like you want to re-invent the
wheel because you have certain coding preferences?

In past mails I have tried to explain my technical motivations, and certainly I don't think yours is a fair summary. I may have failed in explaining myself, but at the moment I'm not interested in trying again.

What would the advantage of MSVC compatibility be for OSS? Is MSVC
freely available?

You can use certain versions of MSVC free of cost, which is what I'm doing.

Specifics please. Which versions and for which OSes.

On which OSes can MSVC be used?

On the ones with 90%+ of the user base?

You are being vague again. The user base of what? Does MSVC work on Solaris? I doubt that.

Autotools are freely available and work on a multitude of OSes
including all the Linux flavors and UNIX OSes.

I actually knew that. On the other hand, many of those OSes won't be able to use Fluidsynth as long as it lacks an audio driver compatible with them. Fluidsynth has a Windows audio driver. Does it have one for Solaris? No? Then what use is a build system that supports Solaris?

Fluidsynth has been ported to Solaris. So, you want to build fluidsynth as a dll?

Right, no offence meant.

Excellent. Sometimes people seem to forget that we are supposed to be doing this for fun.

Absolutely! It may be news to you but the field of Linux audio is filled with musicians who are also hackers.

To my knowledge, C++ is a superset of C so I would imagine that any
code enhancements that you propose could easily be "translated"  to C
if all the objects, containers, methods etc. are clearly defined. If
you know C++ very well, the transition to C in theory would be rather

C++'s features are useful precisely because they can't be simulated in C that easily. But anyway, I won't be doing that translation; good luck to those who will.

Waiting to see what you are going to come up with.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]