[Speex-dev] Speex with PS3 SPE support

[Jean-Marc Valin]

Joost Schuur wrote:
>    Saad has been keeping me in the loop on your recent discussions.
> Since all of our testing has been against 1.0.5, based on that being the
> last non-beta version, that's the particular scope of the task that Saad
> is working on right now. 

I'm just saying it's useless to do any work on 1.0.5. It is inferior to
the latest beta in all aspects, including code quality, performance,
voice quality.

>    I like what I'm reading about as far as encoder/decoder quality
> improvements e.g. in the 1.2 betas, and am going to push for testing for
> compatibility against that here in the future, but it would help us if
> you could comment on when you anticipate coming out with a non-beta
> 1.2..

Don't make a fixation on the beta thing. If I renamed the last beta to
1.2-final, what would it change to you? Also, because Speex is really
small, it means I can make sure every release (including the ones
labeled "unstable") have no known issues at the time of release. And if
you look at the codec only (and not the extra DSP stuff I added in
1.1.x), none of the "unstable" releases has had any major bug.

So please everyone stop making a fuss about version numbers, they're
meaningless if you don't look at the actual piece of software. A beta
release of Speex is far safer than the latest 2.6.x "stable" release of
a Linux kernel, which is still safer than any "service pack" released by
some large OS vendor.

	Jean-Marc

> </j>
> 
> Joost Schuur, Developer Support Manager, IGN Entertainment 
> jschuur at gamespy.com, tel: (714) 460-6728, cell: (949) 923 0074
> Publisher and Developer Services, http://www.poweredbygamespy.com 
> 
> NEW: Online Matters - PubServices blog:
> http://www.poweredbygamespy.com/blog
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Marc Valin [mailto:jean-marc.valin at usherbrooke.ca]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:12 AM
> To: Jim Crichton
> Cc: Saad Nader; speex-dev at xiph.org
> Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] Speex with PS3 SPE support
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Jim Crichton wrote:
>> Please correct me if I am wrong, Jean-Marc, but I do not think that 
>> any patches are getting applied to 1.0.5 anyway.  Also, if you expect 
>> a patch to be applied, you will need to provide the changes as a 
>> patch, not as a modified copy of the source tree.
> 
> That's right. I won't be applying anything 1.0.5 unless it's a security
> issue or something like that.
> 
>> The 1.2 branch includes a mechanism for private memory allocation from
> 
>> a static buffer.  You provide a usermisc.h file that replaces the 
>> normal alloc routines.  You should be able to fix most if not all of 
>> your alignment issues there, rather than putting conditionals in
>> the main code.   I do not know if it will allow you to avoid the
>> __attribute__ directives.  Look at the TI subdirectory in the main 
>> tree for an example of how this is done. There is a bit of a hack for 
>> providing a private stack without changing the API.  I do not think 
>> that there is any precedent for platform specific API changes, such as
> 
>> what you have proposed.
> 
> That reminds me that I've just moved lots of stuff around with the
> allocation functions. Can you check that the TI stuff still works with
> that? In the end, it'll probably make things easier for you now. For
> example, if you link statically, wideband should be automatically left
> out if unused. Also, all the libc stuff is now in os_support.h, which is
> less messy than misc.h/misc.c were.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 	Jean-Marc
> 
>