[gmpi] Re: Topic 3: Cross platform
- From: "Angus F. Hewlett" <amulet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 13:36:47 -0500 (EST)
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Paul Davis wrote:
> if people choose to write plugins with specific
> Altivec/PowerCore/UAD/56K code, that's an entirely different story to
> me than including OS-specific calls that really have nothing to do
> with DSP at all.
IMHO you're taking a simplistic view of what constitutes a plug's DSP
engine at this point. I accept that they may not be ideal from a purist
point of view, but many of today's more complex plugs are doing
platform specific things in the DSP engines... platform-dependent wave
loading; disk streaming; even their own module instantiation. Let's
concentrate on defining the plugin<->host interface for now. BTW, I'm not
defending these design decisions (including my own), just saying they're
done today for pragmatic reasons.
> GMPI didn't force you to do that, but allowed you to. what i
> want to avoid is a situation where developers have to make OS-specific
> calls to get things done, thus being forced to write non-cross-OS code
> by a weakness in GMPI.
OK, but many of those functions -can- be implemented by other
crossplatform code (libsndfile...), but I don't think we should force
incorporation of that in to GMPI.
Regards,
Angus.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
