> > Why don't you all relent, admit you are wrong, and change the synth > > documentation to indicate that the synth inputs are SYNTH channels i.e. > > FSchans as I have called them. > Quite frankly: that is a weird (and a little rude) question to ask.
I don't think David is interested in a factual discussion. Look at his previous, completely unrelated (and partly false) statements that he came up with: * "the synth.cpu-cores setting is useless" * V2 has a "more complex API" * "V2 uses a whole host of extra .dll's" The original problem was that David was broadcasting NoteOn events to various channels while he was failing to broadcast ControlChanges as well. That's it! Sh*t happens. And for somebody who was "designing and writing software ever since the first microprocessors came on to the market" I cannot seriously believe that this failure was due to the fact that we call these channels "midi channels" rather than "synth channels". Sorry. So, just let him be happy with his broken 1.1.8 . And if he thinks he can do a better job on parallelization by using four hardcoded synth instances despite "[he] cannot predict how many cores [the] users PC's [will have]", let him do it as well. Tom _______________________________________________ fluid-dev mailing list fluid-dev@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-dev
