Re: Linking libraries in machines.

[Knos]

[Neil Nelson <address@hidden>]


| mts wrote:
| 
| > I suspect that this is the exactly thing that should be included in
| > GearLib...
| > 
| > On the other side, is reasonably to include whole FFTW in Gearlib?
| > There are licencing issues at the respect ?
| > Should we include in Gearlib every posible code piece that a developer
| could
| > need and convert-it to "the mother of all sound libraries" ?
| 
| I understand Octal to be a performance music or sound generator, while
| at
| the moment the potential applications of FFTW for performance (live)
| sound
| seem rather remote.

why? 

| And the FFTW package is of a substantial size and
| requires a specialized installation that seems a bit of an overkill.  

It seemed to me just a simple library to me. The only thing a bit annoying
with 
it is that you have to choose between float or double support.

| And then
| there are some basic limitations in generating arbitrary sounds with the
| discrete Fourier transform (FFTW) even if one could code the front-end
| required to use it.

why?

--
  n
++k