From alsa-devel-owner@alsa.jcu.cz  Tue Jan 19 10:35:06 1999
Received: from flex.com (flex.com [206.126.0.13])
	by marvin.jcu.cz (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA29418
	for <alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz>; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 10:35:01 +0100
Received: from flex.com (flex.com [206.126.0.13])
	by flex.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id XAA16427;
	Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:34:52 -1000 (HST)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:34:52 -1000 (HST)
From: Jimen Ching <jching@flex.com>
To: alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz
cc: cbagwell@sprynet.com
Subject: alsa-lib
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.4.02A.9901182325230.15776-100000@flex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz
Sender: alsa-devel-owner@alsa.jcu.cz
Precedence: list

Hi all,

I've just finished reading the alsa-lib documentation.  I see that the
library has support for a few sound file formats.  I am in the process of
adding alsa support into sox, and noticed that sox has its own library.
Sox's library supports a lot more file formats and quite a few sound
functions, i.e. echo, vibro, etc.  I'm wondering if it would be a good
idea to merge the library somehow.  It seems to be a duplication of effort
if we end up with two libraries that does the same thing.

Note, the library I'm talking about is just the file format and sound
effect support.  alsa-lib and sox would end up being front-ends or
wrappers around this lower-level library.  The benefit of this is that, we
have a library API which is cross-platform, and alsa-lib would gain all of
the file formats already in the sox library.

What do people think about this?

--jc
--
Jimen Ching (WH6BRR)      jching@flex.com     wh6brr@uhm.ampr.org



