[gmpi] Re: Topic 1: Audience for and users of plugins
- From: RonKuper@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 15:48:00 -0500
>>>
This is much much too broad a target, which will lead to an over-complicated
platform, which is not really powerfull (because there, for instance, will
be things you cannot generalize on DSP-chip platforms).
<<<
In your opinion, would a suitable target be one where plugins couldn't
cross-compile across "host based" and "DSP based" systems, but instead there
was a well defined interface boundary to allow hosts to talk to DSP
accelerators?
In other words, define GMPI so all hosts assume a plugin has a GMPI
interface. If a vendor like Universal Audio, TC, or Digidesign wants to
write DSP accelerated plugins, they need to write a GMPI proxy layer. We
would define the proxy layer with consideration towards what DSP
accelerators might want to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
