[gmpi] Re: Req 76,78

  • From: "Angus F. Hewlett" <angus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 19:49:12 +0000

Jeff McClintock wrote:

Very good point. Lets not over-complicate GMPI by trying to host every possible music application. GMPI is not an operating system.

Some people regard GMPI's design decisions such as "plugin state fully exposed to host" as 'cramping their style'. However such things make the user experience so much better.

Caveat:- only so far as the user is able to make sense of what is exposed to them, and as far as the plug-in is able to react to such state changes in an efficient manner.


I can think of many situations where you DON'T want to expose the entire state to the user (or at least not without some kind of filtering mechanism, maybe some dynamic attributes of GMPI's parameter structure to say "these are the -important- parameters"). There's an awful lot of cases with big plugs where you have thousands upon thousands of parameters, but only 10 or 20 that 95% of users actually want to automate.

If GMPI is to be adopted as a commercial standard, it has to be able to handle some very big plugs, and some very dumb users :-)

Regards,
         Angus.

--
=========================================================
Angus F. Hewlett, Managing Director (CEO)
FXpansion Audio UK Ltd - http://www.fxpansion.com
Registered in the UK - #4455834 - VAT: GB 798 7782 33
=========================================================



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