- From: Norbert Schnell <Norbert.Schnell@ircam.fr>
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:41:11 +0200
- To: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
- Cc: Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com>, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan@mozilla.com>, "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
On 11 sept. 2014, at 15:41, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote: > I think this is actually indefinite in the spec today - and needs to be. "start(0)" (in fact, any "start(n)" where n is < audiocontext.currentTime) is catch as catch can; thread context switch may happen, and that needs to be okay. Do we guarantee that: > > node1.start(0); > ...some really time-expensive processing steps... > node2.start(0); > will have synchronized start times? IMHO, it would be rather important that these two really go off at the same time : var now = audioContext.currentTime; node1.start(now); ...some really time-expensive node2.start(now); ... unless we can well define what "really time-expensive" means and the ability to avoid it. Is that actually case? I was never sure about this... Evidently it could be sympathetic if everything < audioContext.currentTime could just be clipped and behave accordingly. That would make things pretty clear and 0 synonymous to "now", which feels right. Norbert
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2014 14:41:40 UTC