Re: [Minutes] Audio WG teleconference 18 June 2015

Understood. Maybe Paul will be able to pull together a more complete
response to the current proposal, which will help us keep things moving.

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:

> 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"
>>
>
>


-- 
.            .       .    .  . ...Joe

*Joe Berkovitz*
President

*Noteflight LLC*
49R Day Street / Somerville, MA 02144 / USA
phone: +1 978 314 6271
www.noteflight.com
"Your music, everywhere"