[gmpi] Re: Topic 7: Audio packaging, Process-In-Place

> I don't think multichannel plugins (mixers, synths with audio inputs, 
> multichannel effects, ...) are all that much of a corner case, but I 
> could be wrong... Anyway, with only a single flag for "in-place 
> capable", practically all of these will have to say "in-place 
> broken", forcing hosts to set up extra buffers for every output, even 
> if each one of them could reuse an input buffer.

I keep saying 'baton-passing' and no one says no, but no one seems to give
it any heed, either.  It's a DIFFERENT idea, but I think it is a GOOD idea.
It leaves optimizations to the plugin.

It gives you channel bundling unbundling at near-zero cost.

It lets the plugin decide when and how to reuse buffers or not, even
dynamically.

It avoids an overly-simple single flag.

It avoids any overly complex mapping scheme.

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