[Clam-devel] very basic processings examples / no time-domain audio gain in NE?

[Hernán Ordiales]

On 11/19/07, David García Garzón <dgarcia at iua.upf.edu> wrote:
> On Diumenge 18 Novembre 2007, Hernán Ordiales wrote:
[snip]
> > i know that already exists this guide:
> > http://clam.iua.upf.edu/wikis/clam/index.php/Creating_a_minimal_processing_
> >object but maybe is also useful to add it in some place as basic
> > reference...
>
> When creating the tutorial pages of the wiki we intended to split the former
> simple but full example (ports+controls+config) into aspects just because the
> tendency of users is to copy and paste examples that leads into having
> complex processings even when it was not needed. CLAM is full of empty
> configuration objects, meaningless controls just in case and code with empty
> implementation of deprecated optional virtual functions such SetPrototypes
> and the like just because the first examples defined every single redefinable
> function. Anyway, maybe we moved too far. It could be worth to add such
> complete example with ports and controls. If you feel so, just add it to the
> wiki. I would rather like to have exemplifiable code on CLAM: too much of the
> code doesn't follow current guidelines of coding processing but old ones ;-)
>
> Something i would like to do is adding to the wiki a 'Further reading' section
> to connect, for example, the the basic example to the one of the controls and
> the one of the configurations. I just added one to the simple processing one.

nice

> > if you want, you can suggest changes here, making something like a
> > diff (only make changes and post):
> > BaseProcessing.hxx: http://clam.pastebin.com/f6dad9724
> > BaseProcessing.cxx: http://clam.pastebin.com/f13032ff1
> > (commented code is to easily convert it in a processing with a
> > configuration)
>
> We consider having commented out code a bad practice. If any example a new
> user does starts with commented out code that's bad.

i know, i made it in that way to have in the same file a simple start
point for a basic processing with configuration (the commented code)
or not
own use purposes, not to commit or show in that way in the wiki or elsewhere

> Also, the commented out code refers to the NullProcessingConfig. I would not
> even mention it. If you need NullProcessingConfig you don't need any Config.

then i have a question: if i don't do it in that way (removing all the
config code regarding NullProcessingConfig) i get a "red processing"
in NE until i configure it pressing "Configure" at the context menu of
the processing and pressing ok to enable it.

> > As a next basic example i thought in an audio linear amplifier... was
> > weird to me but i could not find a basic time-domain audio gain in
> > networkeditor's processings (exists?), so i made one by my own...
> >
> > AudioGain.hxx: http://clam.pastebin.com/f78113b36
> > AudioGain.cxx: http://clam.pastebin.com/f1643ef69
> >
> > should i commit this one? or there is an special reason to not have a
> > time-domain amplifier?
>
> An AudioAmplifier It would be a nice addition. Some months ago I wondered the
> same question, until i realized you can use the AudioMixer with a single
> channel whenever we want to amplify something,

btw, how this would work? i can only see one audio output in that processing

> but i it would be good to add
> an specific processing, just to be findable. Usability and not processing
> types economy should be the rule.
>
> We could also say that there are a lot of ladspa plugins for that, but you are
> right, looking for an amplifier example is a typical way to start learning a
> processing framework. Adding such processing without the fuzz of old
> processings as example to look at is a nice thing ;-)

can you point me (or remove and post there) old guidelines code here?:

> > AudioGain.hxx: http://clam.pastebin. com/f78113b36
> > AudioGain.cxx: http://clam.pastebin.com/f1643ef69

On 11/19/07, Xavier Amatriain <xavier at amatriain.net> wrote:
[snip]
> There is a time-domain gain implemented in a sample by sample manner in the
> SampleBySample collection in the NetworkEditor Processing collection.

at first i tried with that but is not working at least with a common
audio input, i'm getting this backtrace:

http://clam.pastebin.com/m4291743e

for a minute i thought was for another thing, but now you confirmed it

btw, i did a quick check in the code, seems like a expression
templates schema, don't?

> However this is probably not general purpose enough to replace what hordia
> is proposing. I agree this would be an interesting addition. Actually I
> think that
> there should be far many more time-domain processing classes, be it in a
> sample by sample or block processing manner.
On 11/19/07, David García Garzón <dgarcia at iua.upf.edu> wrote:
> I definitely should take a look at the sample by sample way. We started,
> within the 3d acoustic part to do consider diferent processings for streaming
> audio and buffered audio so we could end up with 3 repeated processings. Ok,
> review them into my spare-time to-do's.

ok, then just let me know if i have to commit something...
if sample by sample is working, is ok for me (i'll try to review it deeper then)

i like the idea of my audio amplifier as first approach in time-domain
processings because it has a very simple code (sample by sample code
could be a little complex to start with)

cheers,
-- 
Hernán
http://h.ordia.com.ar
GnuPG: 0xEE8A3FE9