Re: [Jack-Devel] C++ development of Jack enabled applications--particularly SysExec

PrevNext  Index
DateFri, 06 May 2011 00:08:07 +0900
From Sean Beeson <[hidden] at gmail dot com>
To"Gabriel M. Beddingfield" <[hidden] at gmail dot com>
Cc[hidden] at jackaudio dot org
In-Reply-ToGabriel M. Beddingfield Re: [Jack-Devel] C++ development of Jack enabled applications--particularly SysExec
Follow-UpGabriel M. Beddingfield Re: [Jack-Devel] C++ development of Jack enabled applications--particularly SysExec
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Gabriel M. Beddingfield <[hidden]
> wrote:

>  I just use the standard  jack.h  c header, and wrote my own class around
>>> that... there is a "jackmm" file up on sourceforge, I belive it works but
>>> have no experience. Most of the docs online refer to the C API, so I'd
>>> stick
>>> with that one to have a reference to look at.. Your choice though!
>>>
>>>
>> You gave a lot of signposts to look for. It`s encouraging to hear you have
>> good results wrapping the C API and I won't sweat having to someone
>> else's.
>>
>
> Recommendation from a C++ fan:  stick with JACK's C API.
>
> There aren't any good C++ API's for JACK.  The ones that exist are very
> limiting.  Plus, the C API is simple enough that it doesn't make a lot of
> sense to wrap the API.


This is sounding better all the time. :-)

 channel(through Jack) to and from the hardware. The question is whether
> Jack
> can handle the larger sysexec messages. I know ALSA does fine with them
>

The answer is: no.
>
> This has been discussed a bunch on this list... so you might want to search
> through the archives.


Sorry, I should have checked first. At this point I'll take your word on it
though.


>
>  Yeah, I do have a few years behind me developing database
>> applications(mainly java/c#). It's the understanding of the Jack API,
>> wxWidgets and learning C/C++(or relearning it after over 10 years of not
>> using it since my undergraduate days) that are the main hurdles.
>>
>
> Why wxWidgets?  I've never had a good experience with that.
>
> I would recommend a Qt or GTK+ route.  You'll get more bang for your buck.
>
> -gabriel
>
>
I was thinking it may be a good route to take, so as to be portable to win
and os x also. I'm not all that familiar with the GUI libraries. I will
definitely listen to your recommendation.

-S
PrevNext  Index

1304608108.25298_0.ltw:2,a <BANLkTikQ-BkS=SUz9cC5b7ExR0rvra04Dw at mail dot gmail dot com>