[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 4/6] Notify port available status changes
tanuk at iki.fi
Tue Nov 8 09:52:51 PST 2011
On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 09:09 +0100, David Henningsson wrote:
> On 11/03/2011 08:22 PM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> > Review below. Slightly bigger complaints this time :/
> Hmm, I think your "-- Tanu" line makes Thunderbird skips quoting the
> rest of the message, which is slightly inconvenient. Are other people
> having the same trouble?
Sorry, I didn't think of that.
> >> + pa_assert(status != PA_PORT_AVAILABLE_UNKNOWN);
> > Why? I don't think we can guarantee that we will never lose track of
> > port availability.
> To me, there are only two classes; ports without availability info
> (always unknown), and ports with availability info (always toggling
> between yes and no). Do you see a reasonable use case where we'll lose
> the availability?
No, I don't. I was thinking of some pretty theoretical cases, and now I
realize that it's not a good idea to try to prepare for future code that
probably won't ever materialize.
> > I'd like ports to have their own subscription class.
> I also think that could be nice, and I looked into that, but as I
> understand it, it would require every port to be registered with the
> core (so it gets an index that is used when things change) and several
> API additions to make it useful.
I'm not sure what you mean by "several API additions", but at least
registering port objects to the core would be something that I'd
actually like to see happen.
More information about the pulseaudio-discuss