Soft-Sound | Android Sound Machine | Audio Utils library
kandi X-RAY | Soft-Sound Summary
kandi X-RAY | Soft-Sound Summary
Play relaxing sounds to help you sleep, concentrate or stay calm. Soft Sound was made in a single day!.
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
Currently covering the most popular Java, JavaScript and Python libraries. See a Sample of Soft-Sound
Soft-Sound Key Features
Soft-Sound Examples and Code Snippets
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on Soft-Sound
QUESTION
My problem: I want to load 70 sounds in my app and then want to play multiple sound(maximum 8 sound at a time). Example app is below: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.relaxio.sleepo
I try SoundPool system in my app and it give me a problem in loading. SoundPool take about more then 60 seconds for loading 70 files. So this option is not good for my app. Then i try MediaPlayer. MediaPlayer is ok with loading but give another problem. When i set looping in mediaplayer then it give a gap between restarting. Then i found a github project that play multiple sound at a time and also the loading is fast but still i have problem with this project. It can't load more then 30 sounds properly. In this project they use ExoPlayer(link is below). https://github.com/zoenb/Soft-Sound
Please help me what can i do so that the loading of sound and loop gap problem to be solved.
...ANSWER
Answered 2019-Jul-23 at 06:42yes, you have to create multiple(8) instances of exoplayer, you can't do it with one instance
here is my code,
QUESTION
Let me clarify the soft-sounding title straight away. This is actually something that has been nagging me for quite a while now, despite feeling like a pretty basic question.
Many languages give a faulty impression of efficiency by letting the developer play with bits, such as thebool.h
C header which, as I understand it, is essentially just an int with a wrapper around it. Essentially, the byte seems to be the absolute lowest atomic unit of computation in C - bool x = 0
is not faster/more memory efficient than int x = 0
.
What I'm wondering is then, what do we do when we want to implement an algorithm that is inherently tied to loading and manipulating single bits, such as decoding binary codes, unweighted graph connectivity problems and many others? In other words, is the atomicity of the byte an inherent property of modern CPUs or could we theoretically rival the efficiency of an ASIC just by using machine code?
EDIT: Pretty surprised by the downvotes, but I suppose people just didn't understand what I was asking. I think a really good, canonical example is traversing a binary tree (or any other sequential list of yes/no questions really). What I was wondering is if modern cpu architectures are fundamentally poorly equipped to do this (as compared to an ASIC/FPGA, that is), or if this is an artifact of some abstraction layer (language/kernel/etc). Mark's answer was good though (although I'd love a reference to the mentioned architecture extension)
...ANSWER
Answered 2017-Jan-10 at 21:33By convention, a byte is the smallest addressable piece of memory in a computer. The number of bits that a byte has can differ from one system to another.
In the case of x86, there are instructions to move bytes from memory to a register and back, and instructions to manipulate values in registers. I can't speak to other architectures, but they most likely work in a similar way.
So anytime you need to manipulate some number of bits you need to do so a byte (or word, i.e. multiple bytes) at a time.
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install Soft-Sound
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page