[PD-dev] Alternative to Portaudio under Windows

[Miller Puckette]

Well, I've seen latencies down to 6 msec in linux using ringbuffers.  They
theoretically only add 64 samples of latency.  So I don't think that in itself
is the problem.  

I think the problem in Windows is the "audio server" that non-ASIO audio I/O 
apparently always goes through.  Also, I think it's not feasible to use audio 
callbacks in Windows since Pd can make system calls (e.g., allocate memory) 
during the callback -- linux and Mac allow this but Windows doc says not
to do that.  (This shold be a leftover warning from older times but I've been
heeding it anyway.)

cheers
Miller

On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 05:42:12PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote:
> Hi,
> the incredible latency under Windows is actually not caused by  
> portaudio.
> It's rather used by the fact that a ringbuffer is used to transfer  
> audio data to the driver side. I don't know if the newer callback- 
> based implementation (pd 0.41 or so, see the pd audio dialog) is also  
> working under Windows - it should reduce the latency drastically.
> gr~~~
> 
> Am 14.09.2008 um 11:54 schrieb PSPunch:
> 
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >
> >This was just a thought and not a theme I need immediate answers.
> >
> >I believe it is common understanding that Pd on Windows has much  
> >latency
> >issues than on other platforms.
> >
> >Has there been any attempts like, say, add native ASIO support to Pd?
> >Is there any specific process towards the end of the chain which makes
> >it difficult to add new types of outputs?
> >
> >
> >--
> >David Shimamoto
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Pd-dev mailing list
> >Pd-dev at iem.at
> >http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
> 



> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev