Rockbox mail archiveSubject: AW: AW: Recording as plugin?
AW: AW: Recording as plugin?
From: perterm <perterm_at_vce.de>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:34:40 +0100
> Von: ajf_at_midmaine.com
> As someone who records a lot, and would't own the Archos without this
> feature, I am unpersuaded that making recording a plug-in is the best way
> to spend developer time.
> I would favor scheduled recording, further work on silence detection, and
> more precision in time split recording as areas needing more immediate
I too record a lot with this thing. And I am not yet confident with the way
it works now. I only came across this idea because I currently am writing
demo code for silence detection (which I call triggered recording). But this
makes me realize that I spread a lot of code over various places all over
rockbox. For example my trigger code momentarily resides in the peak meter
because that's the place where the peak values are observed. When recording
becomes a plugin in it would be better to put the trigger code into that
plugin and just provide some interfaces to the peak meter code. It might
become quite some code when other features (eg. scheduled recording) are
implemented. If we decide to bundle up recording in a plugin we should do so
early. The later we start with it the more code must be collected ->
increased waste of time.
As long as rockbox has short cut button combos for obscure features like
invert screen or upside down but requires to navigate menues for recording
it doesn't deserve to be called a recorder. Every tape deck does better.
Other users will disagree on this.
One feature I consider absolutely must-have for recording is a plugin auto
loader that loads a plugin on start up. Maybe even some plugin preload
mechanism, that automatically preloads the last plugin used (or a specified)
but does not execute it yet. And I want something that can be used as
"resume recording" just like "resume playback". Well - lets finish that
Received on 2004-01-08