Dn-FamiTra VS devtools

blip_buffer and blip_buf are fairly decent tools for generating an output-rate signal from a high-rate signal (though I use my fork of blip_buffer at https://gitlab.com/exotracker/blip-buffer-exo and/or https://github.com/Dn-Programming-Core-Management/Dn-FamiTra...). When emulating sound chips, the blip buffer adds and subtracts bandlimited sinc impulses from an output-rate delta array, and when exporting resampled audio, it performs a running sum (transforming the impulses into steps) of the delta array and high-passes the running value when writing to the output audio array. The advantage is that you can pick very high sampling rates (like 1.79 MHz) but only burn CPU cycles each time the output level changes (unlike conventional resamplers which are O(input rate + output rate)). Unfortunately blip_buffer has a relatively low SNR of ~50 dB of aliasing rejection even at its widest impulse kernel (as measured by https://gitlab.com/exotracker/exotracker-cpp/-/tree/rewrite-..., though possibly blip_buf is better), and only performs an approximate highpass using integer bitshifts. A usage example is at https://github.com/Dn-Programming-Core-Management/Dn-FamiTra....

Alternatively you can generate a high-rate signal and feed it into a conventional resampler to produce a 44.1/48/96 KHz output. I found that libsamplerate (https://libsndfile.github.io/libsamplerate/)'s medium preset produces audibly transparent output at 44.1 KHz and above, and should have acceptable latency on the order of 1ms (I didn't verify but you could first flush out the startup edge effect with silence, pop all output, then push an impulse followed with silence until the central peak emerges from the output). This has minimal CPU usage for a single stereo 128 KHz input stream (like in exotracker and chipsynth SFC), but I don't know if it burns excessive CPU with 1.79 MHz input.

----

My baseline expectation for production-quality emulators is to generate sound without aliasing, but the gold standard is to properly emulate the audio path as found on hardware, by feeding schematics through SPICE and/or pole-zero math to create an analytical representation of the filters, then verifying them against MDFourier tests (hardware recordings of broad-spectrum sound played by the console). Few emulators attempt to do this; according to https://bel.fi/alankila/modguide/interpolate.txt, UADE (an Amiga emulator) gets this right using a variation of the Blip_Buffer approach with longer precomputed(?) impulse responses specialized for Amiga filtering. Several chiptune tools properly model hardware filters, including the chipsynth family of audio VSTs (commercial); Dn-FamiTracker (an open-source NES composer) emulates FDS lowpass properly without aliasing, but only loosely approximates 2A03 lowpass and global highpass using blip_buffer's configurable filtering (impulse/step visualizer at https://gitlab.com/exotracker/exotracker-cpp/-/blob/rewrite-...).

If you choose to model a hardware filter using IIR filters (mathematical arithmetic based off a hardware model) instead of a large precomputed impulse response (like interpolate.txt and UADE), you'll get more accurate results if you generate audio at a high internal sampling rate, IIR-filter the audio at this high rate (ensuring the filter cutoff is well below Nyquist or half the sampling rate), then feed it into a resampler. If you use Blip_Buffer to generate 44.1 or 48 KHz directly like blip_buffer, and apply a filter with cutoff above 10 KHz or so, high frequencies will not be filtered accurately.

One interesting idea (combining blip_buffer's efficiency at handling sparse signals, and the accurate treble filtering enabled by a high intermediate filtering frequency) is running a blip_buffer-like system (with no highpass but a ~20 KHz lowpass) to downsample from a high internal rate to a fixed 128 KHz (for fixed filtering) or twice the audio rate (for efficient rational-factor downsampling), then performing hardware filtering there before downsampling using a resampler. The downside is that this stacks the latency and artifacts of both Blip_Buffer and the resampler, but if you make Blip_Buffer generate mostly-lowpassed audio and avoid generating nonlinear harmonics in filtering, you can use a faster second resampler that assumes its input is mostly lowpassed (using a narrower sinc kernel).

Frankly I feel state management is a difficult task on desktop apps as well, to the point that tracking spaghetti-shaped causation and control flow is beyond my mental abilities. Qt itself as well as many apps are rife with redundantly calculating state or redrawing GUIs when changing the same value multiple times, or changing two values which both affect an outcome (my StateTransaction pattern mostly alleviates this issue with a set of dirty bitflags and recomputing all state dependent on those bits, though the reactivity system is currently hard-coded and statically dispatched, and generalizes poorly to open-ended state or managing the local state of many dialogs of the same type). And one of the craziest errors caused by witnessing malformed intermediate values is https://github.com/Dn-Programming-Core-Management/Dn-FamiTra..., where a sloppily-written "load document" function redrew the UI in the middle of mutating document state, causing the GUI to crash after observing a broken invariant.

It saddens me that so much of research in developing better state management techniques is in such a bloated and dependency-laden environment as JavaScript on the web. I like QML's reactivity system, but its evaluation engine is JS-based, dynamically-typed, and dynamically-scoped, and the UI engine itself is a buggy mess. And GTK4's list APIs promise to be better than the clusterfuck of Qt Widgets/Quick's QAbstractItem{Model/View} system (which abstracts poorly over list/column/tree collections, and widget-internal, cross-widget, and cross-application drag-and-drop), but I haven't tried that either.

In audio code, I'd rather use a properly written wait-free SPSC queue, than a least-common-denominator messaging mechanism provided by the standard library like postMessage() (where both the Win32 and JavaScript version suffer from contention and cause audio stuttering, see https://github.com/Dn-Programming-Core-Management/Dn-FamiTra... and https://blog.paul.cx/post/a-wait-free-spsc-ringbuffer-for-th...), though I'm not sure if generic channel/queue objects are as bad in practice. And message-passing (with anything other than primitive types) is a pattern for sharing memory that, if properly implemented and utilized (you don't send a pointer through a channel and access from both threads/goroutines), ensures no more than 1 thread accesses the object in a message at a time.

I think most but not all code can be constructed using primitives like (regular or wait-free) message queues and (RwLock or triple buffer) value cells, but I think all concurrent code which communicates with other threads of execution needs concurrent reasoning to design and write correctly. In my experience, Rust marking data as exclusive or shared is quite helpful for concurrent design and reasoning, whereas prohibiting shared memory altogether reduces performance drastically but is no better at correctness. I think message-passing merely shifts data race conditions into messaging race conditions (but perhaps Go is easier to reason about in practice than I expect). In fact, message passing between separate OS processes per service (like PipeWire) turns multithreading into multiprocessing and distributed systems, making it harder to establish consistent execution states or data snapshots at any point in time, or reason about invariants.

And even code not intended to communicate between threads needs to take care that no state is shared and mutated by another thread on accident (I concede this is easier with JS Web Workers or Rust which restrict shared mutability, than C++, Java, or Go which don't).

Exactly - that's what we've already built for web development at https://replay.io :)

I did a "Learn with Jason" show discussion that covered the concepts of Replay, how to use it, and how it works:

- https://www.learnwithjason.dev/travel-through-time-to-debug-...

Not only is the debugger itself time-traveling, but those time-travel capabilities are exposed by our backend API:

- https://static.replay.io/protocol/

Our entire debugging frontend is built on that API. We've also started to build new advanced features that leverage that API in unique ways, like our React and Redux DevTools integration and "Jump to Code" feature:

- https://blog.replay.io/how-we-rebuilt-react-devtools-with-re...

- https://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2023/10/presentations-reac...

- https://github.com/Replayio/Protocol-Examples

Replay's founders originally worked as engineers on the Firefox DevTools (and in fact our debugger client UI started as a fork of the FF Devtools codebase, although at this point we've rewritten basically every single feature over the last year and a half). So, the original Replay implementation started as a feature built into Firefox, and thus the current Replay recording browser you'd download has been our fork of Firefox with all the recording capabilities built in.

But, Chromium is the dominant browser today. It's what consumers use, it's devs use for daily development, and it's what testing tools like Cypress and Playwright default to running your tests in. So, we're in the process of getting our Chromium fork up to parity with Firefox.

Currently, our Chromium for Linux fork is fully stable in terms of actual recording capability, and we use it extensively for recording E2E tests for ourselves and for customers. (in fact, if you want to, all the E2E recordings for our own PRs are public - you could pop open any of the recordings from this PR I merged yesterday [0] and debug how the tests ran in CI.)

But, our Chromium fork does not yet have the UI in place to let a user manually log in and hit "Record" themselves, the way the Firefox fork does. It actually automatically records each tab you open, saves the recordings locally, and then you use our CLI tool to upload them to your account. We're actually working on this "Record" button _right now_ and hope to have that available in the next few weeks.

Meanwhile, our Chrome for Mac and Windows forks are in early alpha, and the runtime team is focusing on stability and performance.

Our goal is to get the manual recording capabilities in place ASAP so we can switch over and make Chromium the default browser you'd download to make recordings as an individual developer. It's already the default for configuring E2E test setups to record replays, since the interactive UI piece isn't necessary there.

Also, many of the new time-travel-powered features that we're building rely on capabilities exposed by our Chromium fork, which the Firefox fork doesn't have. That includes the improved React DevTools support I've built over the last year, which relies on our time-travel backend API to extract React component tree data, and then does post-processing to enable nifty things like sourcemapping original component names even if you recorded a production app. I did a talk just a couple weeks ago at React Advanced about how I built that feature [1]. Meanwhile, my teammate Brian Vaughn, who was formerly on the React core team and built most of the current React DevTools browser extension UI, has just rebuilt our React DevTools UI components and started to integrate time-travel capabilities. He just got a working example of highlighting which props/hooks/state changed for a selected component, and we've got some other neat features like jumping between each time a component rendered coming soon. All that relies on data extracted from Chromium-based recordings.

[0] https://github.com/replayio/devtools/pull/9885#issuecomment-...

[1] https://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2023/10/presentations-reac...

I made a Replay recording of the sandbox:

Hiya folks! In addition to all my free time spent working on Redux, answering questions, and modding this sub, my day job is working on Replay.io. Today we're thrilled to announce our new Replay for Test Suites feature, which lets you record and time-travel debug Cypress (and Playwright) E2E tests as they ran in CI!

FWIW, the Firefox devs who were doing the WebReplay time travel debugging POC weren't, as far as I know, fired. Instead, they left and started Replay ( https://replay.io ), a true time-traveling debugger for JavaScript.

I joined Replay as a senior front-end dev a year ago. It's real, it works, we're building it, and it's genuinely life-changing as a developer :)

Not sure how well this would have fit into Firefox as a specific feature, given both the browser C++ runtime customizations and cloud wizardry needed to make this work. But kinda like Rust, it's a thing that spun out of Mozilla and has taken on a life of its own.

Obligatory sales pitch while I'm writing this:

The basic idea of Replay: Use our special browser to make a recording of your app, load the recording in our debugger, and you can pause at any point in the recording. In fact, you can add print statements to any line of code, and it will show you what it would have printed _every time that line of code ran_!

From there, you can jump to any of those print statement hits, and do typical step debugging and inspection of variables. So, it's the best of both worlds - you can use print statements and step debugging, together, at any point in time in the recording.

See https://replay.io/record-bugs for the getting started steps to use Replay, or drop by our Discord at https://replay.io/discord and ask questions.

I also recently did a Learn with Jason show episode based on this, where we went through many of the same topics, and also looked at the Replay.io time-traveling debugger that I build as my day job:

My day job is working at a company called Replay ( https://replay.io ), and we're building a true "time traveling debugger" for JS. Our app is meant to help simplify debugging scenarios by making it easy to record, reproduce and investigate your code.

I currently work for Replay.io, where we're building a true time-travel debugger for JS apps. If you haven't seen it, check it out - it makes debugging so much easier, and I've solved many bugs that would have been impossible otherwise

That's not a "TypeScript" problem. That's a "JS being transpiled and bundled" problem (of which TS is just one possible example of "transpiling").

JS debuggers (browsers, VS Code, etc) normally use sourcemaps to show you what the original source looked like so you can debug that.

Also, I'll put in a plug for my day job, Replay ( https://replay.io ). Our app is meant to help simplify debugging scenarios by making it easy to record, reproduce and investigate your code.

The basic idea of Replay: Use our special browser to make a recording of your app, load the recording in our debugger, and you can pause at any point in the recording. In fact, you can add print statements to any line of code, and it will show you what it would have printed every time that line of code ran!

From there, you can jump to any of those print statement hits, and do typical step debugging and inspection of variables. So, it's the best of both worlds - you can use print statements and step debugging, together, at any point in time in the recording.

See https://replay.io/record-bugs for the getting started steps to use Replay.

Note that Replay also works best when you have sourcemaps, same as the other debugger tools.