[gmpi] Re: Instruments done, moving on to "Plugin Files"

On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 10:38:30AM +1200, Jeff McClintock wrote:
> This implies that plugin metadata might be stored externally to the dll.  I
> assume this is a performance hack, the assumption being that the host can
> enumerate plugins faster if it doesn't have to load/link each one in order
> to probe it's capabilities.

That was the argument.

>    How can an external file describe a plugin, when the plugin's IO and
> parameter list is potentially 'dynamic'? ( Req 53:   Plugins must be able to
> perform seemingly spontaneous parameter changes. )

It can describe the various basic infos, such as:
- how many plugins in this package
- ids
- self-classification

> Secondly, it's dangerous to have two ways of querying a plugin ( 1-
> directly, 2 - via an external file).. which is authoritative?, what if the
> two do not agree?

I personally agree.  Search the archives for more details (I will do that
later, too).  I recall being outvoted widely.

> Lastly, there are better ways to achieve the performance gain.  Cubase, for
> example, queries all plugins just once, and stores the results in a single
> database.  The host never needs probe a plugin again (except new ones).

Which is, I think, the only sane way to do it.

> I suggest there be one mechanism for querying plugin configuration, by
> loading/linking and querying it directly.  It's simple and foolproof.

I agree.

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