Re: [Minutes] Audio WG teleconference 18 June 2015

I sincerely doubt I can make that.  I'm currently at a week-long summit
meeting, followed by a couple days of vacation, will likely still be
jetlagged at next telcon.



On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> wrote:

> This is good dialogue -- it would be great if we could be at (or very
> close to) a more wrapped-up patch to the spec by the date of the next
> telcon.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Paul Adenot <padenot@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh I thought it was a spec issue, for the parse/compile off-main-thread
>> thing. I'm pretty sure Gecko and IE do off-main-thread parse and compile
>> already, so that might not be an issue.
>>
>> Last I checked, the Worker spec was quite explicit about
>> parsing/compiling script on the same thread as the worker. I'll ask
>> questions to make sure we're reading and understanding the right thing.
>>
>> Also yes, I'll try to think about a name.
>>
>> Paul.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 1) Yes, this isn't a Web Worker - at least, not per AudioWorker
>>> instance, they are more of an AudioGlobalScope.  The entire audio thread
>>> for an AudioContext probably *IS* a WebWorker (or at least quite similar).
>>> If we want to call it something else, as per previous discussion, make a
>>> suggestion, I'm open.  CustomAudioProcessor?
>>>
>>> 2) Yeah, I'd love to use the "native can load dynamic code without
>>> glitching" metric too.  My guidance from Alex and V8 team was that although
>>> this (parsing/compile on a different thread) may happen in the future in a
>>> generic way, it simply isn't possible today in the JS environment.  If/when
>>> it were to happen, one could implement AudioWorkers that work that way.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Paul Adenot <padenot@mozilla.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. AudioWorker Progress
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris has discussed issue #532 with Alex Russell of the TAG. No
>>>>> particular outcomes there but Chris has also found that there seems to be
>>>>> little prospect of having script loading and execution run in some thread
>>>>> other than the audio thread, meaning that loading up AudioWorkers will
>>>>> inevitably cause glitching as scripts are initialize.  This is not a
>>>>> showstopper though: the feature is still incredibly useful and important;
>>>>> it just means that scripts should be loaded either as part of app
>>>>> initialization or while audio is quiescent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Need Paul's input on this, and determination of best way forward to
>>>>> create a reasonable definition of AudioWorker (perhaps still not a Worker,
>>>>> fundamentally) so pushed back on Needs WG Review.
>>>>>
>>>>> @padenot can you please chime on on this subject via email?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah well I'm not happy about that. I'll be talking to some people this
>>>> week. Also, yes, this is not really a worker at this point.
>>>>
>>>> My current thinking is that native can load dynamic code without
>>>> glitching, so Web Audio API should be able to do the same.
>>>>
>>>> Paul.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> .            .       .    .  . ...Joe
>
> *Joe Berkovitz*
> President
>
> *Noteflight LLC*
> 49R Day Street / Somerville, MA 02144 / USA
> phone: +1 978 314 6271
> www.noteflight.com
> "Your music, everywhere"
>