[gmpi] Re: Decision time: 7.2



Tim Hockin wrote: 
I agree with Steve here. I don't think that the plugin should be_
deciding whether or not its current instance is in-place or copy-to._
This is a decision that only the host can make, because it knows the_
context of the graph.



The only time the graph matters is when an input buffer is shared on
more than one input - within a plugin or not.  As long as you don't do that,
or make an exception for that case (mark buffers as read-only), the graph
doesn't matter - unless I am missing something.

That said, I agree that there is a trade off between simplicity and
functionality.  That's one of the things we need to decide, and I am willing
to go with the group decision, as long as it is made based on reality and
not just dislike for new or different models.


No, this is not the only case, not if you extend to the third option, which is mix-to. In this case, the input buffer != output buffer, but the plugin should += into the output, not just assign into it. This can be very useful in a modular host, where you may have an arbitrary number of connections coming in to a single pin. The host can call copy-to on the first input, and mix-to on the subsequent inputs if they exist, saving memory and a buffer mix.

--
Mike Berry
Adobe Systems


----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: