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>
wrote:

> 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