Re: Call for Consensus: retire current ScriptProcessorNode design & AudioWorker proposal from Chris Wilson on 2014-08-13 (public-audio@w3.org from July to September 2014)

From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 08:30:58 -0700
To: Joseph Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>
Cc: Raymond Toy <rtoy@google.com>, "Srikumar K. S." <srikumarks@gmail.com>, "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>, Olivier Thereaux <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>, Audio WG <public-audio@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAJK2wqUfXtm_ghDimDMoZsfga9acDUcRipOq5uKvkML04512Ng@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 6:33 AM, Joseph Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>
wrote:

> All that I am saying is that Web Audio should not try parallelize
> processing all by itself, by trying to use multiple audio threads. I
> believe that some people are implicitly asking for that. This is the idea
> that I think should be set aside.
>

Oh heavens no.  We are in complete agreement there.  That would have to
introduce arbitrary latency at the thread-split lines in the graph, and I
agree is a really bad idea.  (I argued that on some previous thread.)

Received on Wednesday, 13 August 2014 15:31:31 UTC