[gmpi] Re: 3.15 MIDI (What does it mean to be a plugin)

  • From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:57:09 +0100

On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 11:33:58 -0400, Ron Kuper wrote:
> >>>
> But is there anything in the 
> code which would make it practically impossible to port with a 
> GMPI->MIDI translator inside the plugin?
> <<<
> 
> When converting legacy embedded code to host-based GMPI code, I suppose
> not.  But rather than having to put that translator right into the
> plugin, how different is it to have the translator be a separate
> component.

Functionally its similar, but having it inside the plugin means the plugin
author get more control, and reduces the complexity of GMPI.

I doubt that the hypothetical porter would choose to go though MIDI at
all, in this case.
 
> One benefit of the separate component is that it can be updated
> independently, without having to recompile or relink plugins already in
> the field.

i.e. its more likly to break the plugin with (aparently) minor changes ;)

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

Other related posts: