[gmpi] Re: R: Re: Topic 4: Host Interface

> the functions provided by the event stream. Basically, the (unidirectional) 
> event stream would just be used to send the control data, while the 
> bidirectional interface would provide functions that need an immediate 
> response.

yes - such as?

> things like automation data. At the same time, I really don't like the idea 
> of using bidirectional event streams for interfaces because of their 
> asynchronous nature. The solution may be to segregate functionality into 
> unidirectional streams versus interfaces and try really hard not to 
> duplicate anything.

yes, though an event stream can be made sync by sending the event then
running the plugin->process() for 0 samples.  It would handle all events for
'now' then return.  If you truly have a return value, I still think it is
ugly.

I would advocate an event for plugin->activate() or some such.  I just would
hate to see event s duplicate by a plugin->set(control, value) style
interface.  Twice the work.  ick.

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