[gmpi] Re: Req 76,78

  • From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 09:15:23 +0000

On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 08:02:33 +0100, Robert Fehse wrote:
> >76: GUIs are not part of a DSP plugin with private access to the DSP
> internals.
> this sounds reasonable but for some plugin types i think this requirement is
> hardly to fullfill.
> how you would realize a display of the current output waveform or sampledata
> and so on ?
> i think it would be total overhead if these data must be sent to gui value
> by value.

Not if you can send arrays.
> i think the plugin should say whether it needs the same memory area for dsp
> + gui.
> then the host can decide whether it can load and show the plugin or not.

That will mean that there is a random subset of UIs that are not
remotable. Its not the end ofthe world, obviously, but it would be nice if
we could come up with a way of making all GMPI plugin UIs remote runable.

It would be a huge win in the possible future distribted computing network
world. If that never takes off and we all and up running ever bigger and
hotter standalone PCs you'l want that big noisy PC in another room from
your UI machine.
> >78: Plugin GUIs must have the option to be resizeable.
> must have ?
> all plugins made with vstgui would have problems to meet this requirement i
> think.
> and most plugins simply don't need resizing.

I think the imperative was on the specification, ie. "the specification
must give GUIs the option to be resizable".

- 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: