[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Sc-devel] Servers with nil latency?
(The following is intended as a design discussion, I have no
intention of trying to make any changes on this for 3.2)
I fully understand the need for OSC commands without timestamps, but
setting a Server's latency to nil still seems like a hack:
1. It affects all processes using the server rather than only the
processes that need immediate scheduling. So Patterns, that could
schedule their events in advance and stay out of the way are
competing for the same time points as the user interactions.
2. It is not fully supported. For example, in Event the check is
only found in the \note eventType.
3. It seems to conflate an attribute of the Server with a scheduling
Wouldn't it be better to have a separate Server object with the same
NetAddr that sends all bundles without
timestamps? (OK that contradicts point 3 above, but still...)
On Dec 18, 2007, at 4:58 PM, Alberto de Campo wrote:
Hi James and Josh,
Let me rephrase my question: "what is the difference between
setting server's latency to nil and setting it to 0"?
lots of places look up server.latency and use it in sendBundle:
// the server thinks this is too late and complains
s.sendBundle(0, ["s_new", "default", -1, 0, 0]);
// the server silently does this as soon as the bundle comes in
s.sendBundle(nil, ["s_new", "default", -1, 0, 0]);
I use latency nil whenever I need things to respond really quickly,
e.g. with gestural input; or when sending to servers on different
machines without synced clocks.
IMO 'as soon as possible' should be legal, so please leave the
On Dec 18, 2007, at 10:26 AM, James Harkins wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 10:03 AM, ronald kuivila <rkuivila@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
In Event there is a switch for a Server with latency = nil. When
and why does that ever happen?
If you take out the switch, events will die if somebody sets latency
to nil. Do we want to make it an explicit requirement that you must
have a numeric value in the server's latency variable to use event
Obviously it's better for timing if the latency value is there, but
I'm not sure it needs to be an absolute rule - latency or death.
Alberto de Campo
A-8020 Graz, Austria
e-mail : decampo@xxxxxx
Sc-devel mailing list