Fixed Sample Rate in Test Programs

[Esben Stien]

I don't understand why patest_sine has a fixed sample rate of
44100. This makes it non working with a JACK back end, f.ex, which
only supports one sample rate.

Why doesn't this test program read the available sample rate?

Shouldn't this tool also be able to select an output device?

--
Esben Stien is b0ef@e     s      a            
         http://www. s     t    n m
          irc://irc.  b  -  i  .   e/%23contact
           sip:b0ef@   e     e
           jid:b0ef@    n     n
_______________________________________________
Portaudio mailing list
Portaudio@...
http://techweb.rfa.org/mailman/listinfo/portaudio

[Phil Burk]

Hello Esben,

Esben Stien wrote:
> I don't understand why patest_sine has a fixed sample rate of
> 44100. This makes it non working with a JACK back end, f.ex, which
> only supports one sample rate.
> Why doesn't this test program read the available sample rate?
> Shouldn't this tool also be able to select an output device?

patest_sine.c is not a "tool". It is a very simple example program that
demonstrates how to call PortAudio. It should simply fail if the sample
rate is not available.

Adding additional features might obscure the essential steps in calling
PortAudio. There are more complicated examples provided that print
available sample rates and devices.

If you wished to contribute a new example shell program that printed
available rates and devices and allowed users to choose them by entering
a number then it would be appreciated. But I think we should keep the
original patest_sine.c as simple as possible.

Thank you,
Phil Burk

_______________________________________________
Portaudio mailing list
Portaudio@...
http://techweb.rfa.org/mailman/listinfo/portaudio

[Esben Stien]

Phil Burk <nospam@...> writes:

> I think we should keep the original patest_sine.c as simple as
> possible.

Then it maybe shouldn't be called patest*. There should maybe be an
example/ directory for this; paexample* and have proper testing tools
in a test/ directory; patest*.

--
Esben Stien is b0ef@e     s      a            
         http://www. s     t    n m
          irc://irc.  b  -  i  .   e/%23contact
           sip:b0ef@   e     e
           jid:b0ef@    n     n
_______________________________________________
Portaudio mailing list
Portaudio@...
http://techweb.rfa.org/mailman/listinfo/portaudio

[Phil Burk]

Hello Esben,

Esben Stien wrote:
> Phil Burk <nospam@...> writes:
>> I think we should keep the original patest_sine.c as simple as
>> possible.
> Then it maybe shouldn't be called patest*. There should maybe be an
> example/ directory for this; paexample* and have proper testing tools
> in a test/ directory; patest*.

I agree. We have often discussed separating the test programs from the
example programs. It would be nice to have a series of short examples
that demonstrated all the features clearly.

It would also be nice to have a separate folder with real unit tests. We
could have a machine with a cable attached from output to input. The
tests could then analyze the inputs for automated testing.

The existing patest* programs are a combination of examples and
debug/test programs used for hacking and debugging. Unit tests are good
for finding bugs and verifying operation but they are clumsy when doing
actual single step debugging.

We are hoping someone will have time to create the pure examples and
unit tests.

Thanks,
Phil Burk
_______________________________________________
Portaudio mailing list
Portaudio@...
http://techweb.rfa.org/mailman/listinfo/portaudio

[Ross Bencina-3]

Hi Guys

Pieter Suurmond has written a self test program:
http://kmt.hku.nl/~pieter/pa_self_test/

He has given permission for us to include in PA if we want. I havn't tried
it.

Cheers

Ross.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Burk" <nospam@...>
To: <portaudio@...>
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: [Portaudio] Fixed Sample Rate in Test Programs

> Hello Esben,
>
> Esben Stien wrote:
>> Phil Burk <nospam@...> writes:
>>> I think we should keep the original patest_sine.c as simple as
>>> possible.
>> Then it maybe shouldn't be called patest*. There should maybe be an
>> example/ directory for this; paexample* and have proper testing tools
>> in a test/ directory; patest*.
>
> I agree. We have often discussed separating the test programs from the
> example programs. It would be nice to have a series of short examples
> that demonstrated all the features clearly.
>
> It would also be nice to have a separate folder with real unit tests. We
> could have a machine with a cable attached from output to input. The
> tests could then analyze the inputs for automated testing.
>
> The existing patest* programs are a combination of examples and
> debug/test programs used for hacking and debugging. Unit tests are good
> for finding bugs and verifying operation but they are clumsy when doing
> actual single step debugging.
>
> We are hoping someone will have time to create the pure examples and
> unit tests.
>
> Thanks,
> Phil Burk
> _______________________________________________
> Portaudio mailing list
> Portaudio@...
> http://techweb.rfa.org/mailman/listinfo/portaudio
>

_______________________________________________
Portaudio mailing list
Portaudio@...
http://techweb.rfa.org/mailman/listinfo/portaudio