dmoreno

10 ms·

31.
by dmoreno 7y ago
I have not checked the docs yet, but from what I read so far the protocol is actually easier, with clearer fixed size messages for usual operations, with much more information. But it is always required MIDI 1.0 compatibility, so if your d
32.
MIDI 2.0 Specifications Available for Download(ask.audio)
107 points by dmoreno 7y ago|35 comments
33.
by dmoreno 7y ago
MIDI is just the protocol and then there are transports. One of these is ethernet (RTP midi), which should not have this problems. Or Bluetooth, or WiFi (very bad latency). Or USB or DIN 5.
34.
by dmoreno 7y ago
Mine watches for changes in a directory and runs a command on any save change. I use it a lot for Test Driven Development. Modify source code, save and automatically on a terminal it runs `make test` or similar. https://gist.gith
35.
by dmoreno 7y ago
For RTP MIDI, UDP is used. So anything that can transport UDP. Simple Ethernet is more than good enough... but of course the lower the latency, the better.
36.
The State of Network MIDI(mclarenlabs.com)
3 points by dmoreno 7y ago|4 comments
37.
by dmoreno 7y ago
As a side note looks like Adobe has a patent(!) on tabs... And it expires today! https://patents.google.com/patent/US5546528
38.
by dmoreno 7y ago
I guess you can use the free IDs, and then place the uuid in the stream or packet. Everybody happy.
39.
by dmoreno 7y ago
I was just listening to the midi 2.0 webminar from the midi association, and as I understood there are some free sysex and ci id for non profits / hobbists, but if you make money out of it you should register. I guess mainly to prevent
40.
by dmoreno 7y ago
Music performance is a synchronized effort, and with very precise timings. If there is lag, everything is just a bit late and a musician can (unconsciously) compensate up to some point. But for example (if my math is correct) 120 bpm, has 8
41.
by dmoreno 7y ago
I for one expect that MIDI 2.0 helps to boost the RTP MIDI protocol adoption (over ethernet). It has much more speed, longer distances, less latency, proper packet loss recovery (which is not a problem on local networks) and overall much b
42.
by dmoreno 7y ago
As I read it, in brief, it adds much more resolution, and a introspection protocol using bidirectional communication which allows property exchange and profiles. Both very welcome additions! Finally no stepping on CC and note velocity, and
43.
by dmoreno 7y ago
It does not make sense to use it in games. It would need a good synthesis engine plus samples which consumes much more CPU than reproducing a MP3. If in your game you go the synthesis mode (chiptunes and whatnot) MIDI is a comunication prot
44.
Details about MIDI 2.0(midi.org)
281 points by dmoreno 7y ago|147 comments
45.
by dmoreno 7y ago
As explained by LWN: https://lwn.net/Articles/776703/
46.
by dmoreno 8y ago
This sentence, when talking about support for old enterprise versions, is a bit suspicious: > Satellite will not use newer versions of MongoDB that are licensed under SSPL. So my read is that there is not only an intention of database co
47.
by dmoreno 8y ago
I loved the AOSA books, but there's been sometime that they don't publish a new one. Do anybody know if there is something new in the works? And of any other similar books?
48.
by dmoreno 8y ago
Email has several retries. Something like 6hr, 1day, 2days... After that the sender receives a delivery error. All that is managed by the SMTP servers and the numbers change, but normally just losing internet connection or power for some ho
49.
by dmoreno 8y ago
> This suggested techniques to eliminate loads and stores (e.g. switching to a register based bytecode) would be an effective optimization. Did anybody try anything in these line of work?
50.
by dmoreno 8y ago
I still have to read it through, but why does it require new syntax and not just new standard library additions like boost::coroutine? I just fell in love with boost::fiber so i hope there will be also something like it in the future std.
51.
How does Tidelift pay maintainers?(tidelift.com)
87 points by dmoreno 8y ago|32 comments
52.
by dmoreno 8y ago
License. Electron is MIT. Ultralight is proprietary. Electron always free to use even on comercial, ultralight only for small projects.
53.
by dmoreno 8y ago
Another alternative is nextcloud... It also has a sync desktop client and works great in my company for sharing folders with colleagues or keep business documents in sync on desktop and laptop. There are even third parties that install it a
54.
by dmoreno 8y ago
Now it needs a --output=json option to make it awesome and usable from scripts and programs.
55.
by dmoreno 8y ago
AKA calendar versioning. I also love it. http://calver.org/ .
56.
by dmoreno 8y ago
Anybody knows if this also can help improve performance of language interpreters such as CPython?
57.
by dmoreno 8y ago
Similar, but as a library, I did ExoSQL, for elixir [1], and heavily inspired by FDW from poatgres. I think there is great potencial on mixing data from many sources! I think exosql has more features (lateral joins, subqueries, JSON support
58.
by dmoreno 8y ago
From the article: "For performance, it runs with .NET Core on Windows, macOS and Linux, works with Python 2.5 through to Python 3.7 and supports the latest language features"
59.
by dmoreno 8y ago
I completely disagree. Unless your data requirements are very specific, mem only, or not adapted to the relational paradigm any SQL engine will provide you with the best and more efficient algorithms to manipulate your data in the most comm
60.
by dmoreno 8y ago
I followed specially the postgres and sqlite documentations. For some specific areas I checked their source codes. But mainly I used explain from postgres as reference on what algorithms (seq scan, hash scan and do on) use for specific quer

More ›