[gmpi] Re: my first ideas

  • From: Kirill 'Big K' Katsnelson <kkm@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 18:12:40 -0800

Some time ago, Urs Heckmann wrote...

1.) Seperation of Process and GUI

If user interface and process are different things/applications from
the beginning, it is easier to customize access to the process for
certain needs. A PlugIn could offer more than one view (newbie/expert)
or a collection of plugs could be controlled by the same view (a
generic user interface with company-typic layout). A PlugIn could also
be easier controlled in uncommon environments like games, video editing
software if it doesn't feel naked without its gui.

This implicitly requires a flexible parameter handling and notification

The most important aspect of such separation is the ability to compile your DSP for a different platform than your GUI. The simplest scenario is when you have your DSP running on a dedicated DSP card and UI on the host CPU. A more complex case would involve running plugins on a separate computer but controlling them from the main DAW screen.

This implies the definition of plugin-independent wire-ability of
the protocol between GUI and DSP.  This does not have to go as
low as definition of say parameter value sources and sinks - the
protocol can be plugin-dependent, but the Gimpy core must be supplied
with enough information to wire and unwire it.


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