3 ms·
> And if you're not, you need to be capable of buffer filling way more than one frame's worth of audio - at least 100ms, preferably much more. Author addressed
by golergka 6y ago
> And if you're not, you need to be capable of buffer filling way more than one frame's worth of audio - at least 100ms, preferably much more.
Author addressed this point and agrees with it:
> Why don’t you just copy more data each time the handler is called? This was a fair criticism, but changing this behavior involved deeper changes than I was prepared to make
In general, "real time audio" usually refers to low-latency audio, which uninteractive video playback is not.
- pierrefermat1 6y agoYes he addressed it but just said he was unwilling to do anything about it as it resulted in too much change/work That does answer the issue of why it was implemented like that in the first place
- golergka 6y agoWell, it's been my experience that you only find out the proper way to implement something after you do it one or a couple of times.