>> After changing my code to construct a JitterBufferPacket and passing that >> to speex_jitter_put, my program works with the new jitter buffer using the >> wrapper functions (speex_jitter_* instead of the new jitter_buffer_*). > > Oops, I forgot to make sure I keep the API stable for the old buffer. > Any thoughts on the change (revert or continue as is)?Well, I presume the idea of keeping speex_jitter_* around is to enable old programs to compile "out of the box" with newer versions of speex without modifications. I think it would be better to change it so the API is same. I must say I really like the generalized jitter buffer though :) It's a cleaner and more flexible implementation and can more easily be adjusted to contain additional information with each packet.>> But when a new packet is fetched, jitter_buffer_tick isn't called, so if I >> only have one frame per packet, it will never be called. >> >> Is this a bug in speex_jitter_get, or am I doing something wrong? > > This is definitely a bug in speex_jitter_get() because it hasn't been > updated for changes in the "generic" jitter buffer. I'll fix that.Thanks :)
> Well, I presume the idea of keeping speex_jitter_* around is to enable old > programs to compile "out of the box" with newer versions of speex without > modifications. I think it would be better to change it so the API is same.Checked in, but not really tested. Can you confirm it works?> I must say I really like the generalized jitter buffer though :) It's a > cleaner and more flexible implementation and can more easily be adjusted > to contain additional information with each packet.Anything in particular you had in mind? Jean-Marc
On 5/3/06, Jean-Marc Valin <Jean-Marc.Valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote:> > I must say I really like the generalized jitter buffer though :) It's a > > cleaner and more flexible implementation and can more easily be adjusted > > to contain additional information with each packet.This looks interesting to tie into asterisk's jb and plc code as well. __________________> Speex-dev mailing list > Speex-dev@xiph.org > http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/speex-dev >-- Mike Taht PostCards From the Bleeding Edge http://the-edge.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20060503/f2223a17/attachment.html
>> Well, I presume the idea of keeping speex_jitter_* around is to enable old >> programs to compile "out of the box" with newer versions of speex without >> modifications. I think it would be better to change it so the API is same. > > Checked in, but not really tested. Can you confirm it works?Works like a charm now :) Thanks.