W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: Call for Consensus: retire current ScriptProcessorNode design & AudioWorker proposal

From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:22:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJK2wqWz29JLV9+oHCV+qhudvhc0yzap9BaCfCV+4FgDk-RA_A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: Olivier Thereaux <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>, Audio WG <public-audio@w3.org>
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>

> Running JS sync in the audio thread is also suboptimal: it means that JS
> misbehavior can cripple audio processing. I find it easy to imagine cases
> where I'd rather have all my JS analysis code running on the main thread to
> minimize the possibly of breaking my audio output, even though there's a
> small latency penalty.

True enough.  But in that case, you can simply transfer the data over to
another thread to do the processing there, yes?
Received on Wednesday, 13 August 2014 15:23:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:14 UTC