[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wine-devel
Subject:    Re: Concerning the separate OpenAL32.dll thunk patch and
From:       "Nick Burns" <adger44 () hotmail ! com>
Date:       2006-11-30 23:54:36
Message-ID: BAY129-F212EB3273C9C16B42079FABADB0 () phx ! gbl
[Download RAW message or body]

Ok this is some good feedback... (usually i dont get such a massive response 
from emails...)
-- I was under the impression that RFC was the second to last line of 
defense (so it appears to be the third)

I do not use IRC (unless you count the irc client in Tribes)

I can demacroize the patch -- it was written that way to make it small and 
easy to add to (since 99% of the functions are pure passthru -- one extra 
line to the macro adds it and all that it needs)
Personally I think its cleaner -- but it has the problem of being a macro

"There not much worse than a macro -- except dare I mention templates (the 
crowd runs for cover)"

Again -- for the sound drivers -- Mac OSX has ONE sound driver ONE
I would like to have a choice.

Yes my wineopenal patch is not perfect (based on broken code does not help) 
-- I know that -- but thats why i want to get it into wine -- so other 
people who know more about audio can add to it and make it better

If the audio drivers are going to collapse -- I could wait until then and 
'try' add my winmm patch in that realm.

- Nick

>From: Alexandre Julliard <julliard@winehq.org>
>To: Detlef Riekenberg <wine.dev@web.de>
>CC: Nick Burns <adger44@hotmail.com>, wine-devel <wine-devel@winehq.org>
>Subject: Re: Concerning the separate OpenAL32.dll thunk patch and 
>OpenALwinmm driver patch
>Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 19:58:36 +0100
>
>Detlef Riekenberg <wine.dev@web.de> writes:
>
> > I don't know, if wineaudio.drv this is still the way to go, but we have
> > sound crackeling and Buffer-underun Bugs, and adding another copy of
> > the "not very well working" code might be a "no go" for Alexandre.
>
>Exactly, we already have 8 sound drivers, and not a single one
>actually works properly, so I'm pretty reluctant to add yet another
>copy of the same broken code.
>
>The openal dll can certainly go in, but you'll need to clean up the
>code first, right now it looks like a pretty bad case of macro abuse.
>
>--
>Alexandre Julliard
>julliard@winehq.org




[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]