> > (Btw I am not a FluidSynth developer, I'm just interested.)
>
> Oh? Should I also post a bug report somewhere then?
>
There is a bug tracker here:
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/fluidsynth/report
I don't think it gets used much though. It only has 6 active tickets. I get
the feeling that bu
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Matt Giuca wrote:
>
>> Okay, what I did was change Ubuntu 10.04 32-bit -> 64-bit sometime
>> this year (to be clear, I'm speaking about VirtualBox VMs, none of my
>> Ubuntus are/were on host machine). I tried to render the midi file in
>> 1.1.1 and it had piano bug
> Okay, what I did was change Ubuntu 10.04 32-bit -> 64-bit sometime
> this year (to be clear, I'm speaking about VirtualBox VMs, none of my
> Ubuntus are/were on host machine). I tried to render the midi file in
> 1.1.1 and it had piano bug. I updated to 1.1.2 from your unofficial
> ppa on launchp
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Matt Giuca wrote:
> Hey Max,
>
>> Last time I used fluidsynth to render midis was in january 2010 I
>> think (I used the version in ubuntu 10.04, don't remember the number).
>> Everything was fine. However after I updated to 1.1.1 (the current
>> Ubuntu default), I
Hey Max,
Last time I used fluidsynth to render midis was in january 2010 I
> think (I used the version in ubuntu 10.04, don't remember the number).
> Everything was fine. However after I updated to 1.1.1 (the current
> Ubuntu default), I had the "all instruments are pianos" bug and
> decided to up
Hi, all.
Last time I used fluidsynth to render midis was in january 2010 I
think (I used the version in ubuntu 10.04, don't remember the number).
Everything was fine. However after I updated to 1.1.1 (the current
Ubuntu default), I had the "all instruments are pianos" bug and
decided to update to
On 10/19/2010 12:27 PM, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2010-10-19 09:47, Graham Wykes wrote:
Would there be value in looking at the patch than Jim Henry mentioned
(given that it has been effectively tested for many years by hundreds of
users of Miditzer) to see whether it is compatible with the c
>
> So to summarize, the possible approaches are:
>> 1. Stealing from client-malloc; fluid will call free(). Won't work with
>> different allocators other than malloc.
>> 2. Stealing from client-fluid_alloc; fluid will call fluid_free(). At
>> least it lets fluid control the allocator.
>> 3. Borro
On Tuesday 19 October 2010, David Henningsson wrote:
> If you feel that the current API needs incompatible
> > changes, then this feature should go in a library version 2. That's all.
Not a
> > big deal, this is going to happen sooner or later.
>
> If you're talking about dropping backwards compa
On Tuesday 19 October 2010, Matt Giuca wrote:
> ...as long as it doesn't break anything else, which is the hard part.
>
> I think he meant nobody has the right to stop you implementing it in your
> own private branch. It's convincing others to accept them that's the hard
> part :) Which I've le
On Tuesday 19 October 2010, Jim Henry wrote:
> Pedro,
>
> It sounds like you are suggesting a feature that the Miditzer virtual
> organ uses. A number of years ago Sebastian Frippiat suggested extending
> FluidSynth so that the MIDI Player would pass the MIDI events to the
> caller rather tha
On 2010-10-19 11:21, Matt Giuca wrote:
[]
I've cut down the rest of the text, just because I don't think there is
more to add to it.
So to summarize, the possible approaches are:
1. Stealing from client-malloc; fluid will call free(). Won't work with
different allocators other than malloc
On 2010-10-19 09:47, Graham Wykes wrote:
On 19/10/2010, at 6:07 PM, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2010-10-19 00:02, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas wrote:
On Monday 18 October 2010, Matt Giuca wrote:
So my questions for any interested observers (especially FluidSynth
developers):
1. Is this feature
>
> We could also copy the memory. While copying memory around is inoptimal,
> that might be a secondary concern. At least that would give us the most
> future flexibility.
Oh yeah, that was my other thought. I think the problem with that is that
again, in almost all cases I can think of, you'll
On 19/10/2010, at 6:07 PM, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2010-10-19 00:02, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas wrote:
On Monday 18 October 2010, Matt Giuca wrote:
So my questions for any interested observers (especially FluidSynth
developers):
1. Is this feature worth implementing at all?
If you are mo
On 2010-10-19 00:02, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas wrote:
On Monday 18 October 2010, Matt Giuca wrote:
So my questions for any interested observers (especially FluidSynth
developers):
1. Is this feature worth implementing at all?
If you are motivated to do this work, then go ahead. Nobody has any
16 matches
Mail list logo
