Re: [Jack-Devel] backend switching - another way

On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 22:44 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 11:33:26PM +0100, Arnold Krille wrote:
>  
> > You seemed to limit your persistent ports to hardware-ports. I like to remove 
> > the distinction between backends and clients and thus between hardware and 
> > software ports. And I think that virtual/persitent ports can be benefitial to 
> > other apps/use-cases as well as for abstracting the actual hardware/backend.
> 
> I agree, but as my original post should have made clear, that
> is not what I proposed to discuss even if I like the idea.
> Abstracting the HW in this way is something that *could* be
> done given a bit of courage. Doing this with application ports
> as well is much more ambitious, it would have deep consequences
> and would leave little of Jack as we know it.
>  
> Ciao,
> 

Couldn't you just create those abstract ports with yet another client?

Perhaps as an internal client (I assume this saves on context
switches?), it can contain whatever logic for connecting to the real HW
ports as the user desires, or be controlled by a session manager.

This might be a reasonable use of jack_port_tie() perhaps...

Peter.

1298413843.10583_0.ltw:2,a <1298413829.4395.6.camel at atropos dot lan dot fuzzle dot org>