[linux-audio-dev] XAP: a polemic

David Olofson david at olofson.net
Sat Dec 14 20:05:01 UTC 2002


On Sunday 15 December 2002 01.49, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 01:19:08 +0100, David Olofson wrote:
> > > Yes, that was my conclusion too. Its much cleaner than c++, but
> > > its pretty slow. I'm quite supprised that Apple went for it for
> > > DSP code.
> >
> > OTOH, have you looked at how the VST host/plugin interface is
> > actually implemented? Pretty "interesting". :-) (And here we
> > worry about function call overhead...)
>
> No, but I've heard that its not really c++ underneath. I'm always
> worried about looking at things like that incase I even want to
> implement something similar. I think its better to knwo its a (IPR)
> clean implementation.

Yeah, that's probably a good idea. (Not that we'd be very likely to 
copy that part anyway... :-)


> > Seriously though, I think a plugin API of this kind *needing* C++
> > would suggest that there's something wrong with the design. It
> > shouldn't be that complex.
>
> I agree. Sometime its nice to have OO contructs inside plugins
> though, eg. filters are very clean if implemented with OO.

Well, as long as the compiler generates a clean C interface, any 
language is fine for plugin implementations.

Speaking of which, does anyone hack LADSPA plugins in C++, or other 
languages?


//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate

.- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------.
| Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. |
| RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. |
`---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -'
   --- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---



More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list