Discussion:
[Doc] Suggested latency interpretation
(too old to reply)
Olivier S.
2018-06-16 17:09:48 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

I opened this ticket today, for a bug in the doc:

https://app.assembla.com/spaces/portaudio/tickets/realtime_list?ticket=276

I write this mail because I opened the ticket as an anonymous user, so if
needed I can clarify /discuss the issue.

Thanks,

Olivier
Ross Bencina
2018-06-17 08:09:25 UTC
Permalink
Hi Olivier,

In principle I agree that the documentation should be aligned with the
implementations. However I'm not sure that there is a problem. You cite
UInt32 suggestedLatencyFrames = inputParameters->suggestedLatency *
sampleRate

In general, this value is used as input to additional heuristics that
take framesPerBuffer and native API buffer size parameters into account
and *then* round-up. So the truncation in the above line makes little or
no difference to the final rounding-up.

In other words "suggestedLatencyFrames" is not typically the "next
practical value" that the documentation is referring to.

Ross.
Hello,
https://app.assembla.com/spaces/portaudio/tickets/realtime_list?ticket=276
I write this mail because I opened the ticket as an anonymous user, so
if needed I can clarify /discuss the issue.
Thanks,
Olivier
Loading...