3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
blog.tonari.no
3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
1–10 of 211 posts
Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#2Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#3I don’t have many other comments to make other than I am surprised rust-analyzer was only mentioned in passing.
Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#4As for sound, I don’t think audiophile quality is necessary...
Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#5Nitpick: “audiophile-quality sound” it seems, is becoming the new “military-grade encryption.” I don’t have many other comments to make other than I am surprised rust-analyzer was only mentioned in passing.
Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#6Nitpick: “audiophile-quality sound” it seems, is becoming the new “military-grade encryption.” I don’t have many other comments to make other than I am surprised rust-analyzer was only mentioned in passing.
Audiophile grade at least has roots in high fidelity.
Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#7Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#8Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#9Nitpick: “audiophile-quality sound” it seems, is becoming the new “military-grade encryption.” I don’t have many other comments to make other than I am surprised rust-analyzer was only mentioned in passing.
Beyond that I wish the article had explain a bit better why it chose these "better-than-std" crates. I'm actually using all the std variants in my projects, I'm curious to know if I'm missing out or if I just happen not to hit on their limitations.
Re: 3K, 60fps, 130ms: achieving it with Rust
#10Nitpick: “audiophile-quality sound” it seems, is becoming the new “military-grade encryption.” I don’t have many other comments to make other than I am surprised rust-analyzer was only mentioned in passing.