[gmpi] Re: Topic 6: Time representation
- From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 17:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
> I see. But unless being able to set each plug's tempo & position
> independently is a design requirement -- something I hadn't thought
> of -- why make tempo & position 'controls' of the plug? I've been
> thinking of tempo as a sort of global parameter, a property of
> managed by the host, that you go to the host to get, and that looks
> the same to all plugs in the graph.
>
> Though maybe tempo-as-parameter isn't so well-liked.
It is not inconceivable to have multiple tempos for multiple sections of a
graph.
in XAP we adopted this notion of 'Everything is a Control'. Realistically,
some controls are NOT for the user, but they are hinted so that the host can
connect things together properly.
Making tempo a control is a way of making it an optional item. If a plugin
cares about tempo, it defines a control with the TEMPO hint. The host can
see that and do the right thing.
It's not much different than having a per host (or per sub-host) callback,
except it avoid two nasties: 1) the callback list gets large fast 2)
eliminates a function call. Also, having a simple and consistent model
seems very nice, to me.
Tim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
