[gmpi] Re: Decision time: 7.2

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: http://www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe

Other related posts: