[pulseaudio-discuss] Expand the simple API?

David Henningsson david.henningsson at canonical.com
Wed Mar 20 01:32:07 PDT 2013

On 03/20/2013 08:57 AM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 13:20 +0100, Thomas Martitz wrote:
>> Am 19.03.2013 10:56, schrieb Tanu Kaskinen:
>>> I'd be OK with adding pa_simple_writable/readable_size(). I believe the
>>> multi-threading aspect of adding the write/read callbacks unavoidably
>>> makes writing applications not-simple, so the simple API probably
>>> shouldn't have those callbacks.
>> It's not unlikely that an application that uses blocking or polling
>> methods uses an extra thread for that, which it wouldn't do if it could
>> use the callback method. So in this case the callback would simplify the
>> application, because the multi threading aspect is not in the
>> application logic but in pulseaudio. I don't know how common this case
>> is, but I would expect it's rather common.
> The applications would still need to be aware of the threading.
> pa_simple_read/write() is expected to be done from the main thread, so
> the application necessarily needs to implement some communication method
> between the two threads.

 From what I can see, there is no such restriction of the simple API. It 
does not have a concept of a "main thread", so as long as you don't call 
into the simple API from two threads at the same time you should be just 
fine, e g, it would be perfectly valid to do pa_simple_new in one 
thread, and later call pa_simple_write from another thread.

David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.

More information about the pulseaudio-discuss mailing list