[gmpi] Re: Decision time: 7.2
- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 17:04:40 +0100
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 08:41:37AM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > a) Yes. A plugin-global flag indicates a plugins ability to do this.
> > This tells the host that ANY input buffer may be re-used on ANY output
> > (perhaps withing some higher-level grouping of stuff (think MIDI
> > channel?)). If a plug can not accept this rule, it must not use
> > in-place processing. (VST model?)
>
> This would be fine for many plugins - and fine by me, if that is hat people
> want.
It gets my vote. Efficient, known to work, easy to support.
> > c) Yes. A plugin is given inputs and produces it's own output buffers
> > based on internal knowledge or other variables. The host is not
> > involved, except to furnish new buffers as requested. The plugin must
> > re-use or release all input buffers. Variations on this can be devised
> > to allowed shared input/outputs. (baton passing, or similar to DX
> > model)
>
> I think I still prefer this method, but as I said, I'll go with whatever
I dont see what the point is. It fullfils some computer-sciency sense of
completeness, but doesn't actually achieve much - and it adds complexity
of course.
- Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules: Please stay on topic. You are responsible for your own
words. Please respect your fellow subscribers. Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.
Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe
Other related posts:
