[LAD] "enhanced event port" LV2 extension proposal

Dave Robillard drobilla at connect.carleton.ca
Thu Nov 29 23:40:45 UTC 2007

On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 13:25 +0100, Lars Luthman wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 05:59 +0200, Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
> > Also, i doubt we need three "count" members in Event_Port_Buffer
> > structure. used_size - number of used events is perfectly fine by
> > itself. I dont see why plugin should know whether buffer is actually
> > larger.
> It needs to know that for an output buffer.
> > Is midi event type semantics a broad or narrow one? I'd prefer narrow
> > one, i.e. one type for note on/offs, one for pitch bend, and for midi
> > cc, etc. Reasoning behind this is to indicate to user (informational) or
> > maybe to host for runtime optimizations too, that only certain types of
> > midi events will be actually processed. Read this as "lv2zynadd does not
> > respond to MIDI CC events" (zynjacku however maps (will) those to actual
> > parameter changes, through separate ports).
> I'd prefer to just have one MIDI event type and pass the status bytes as
> part of the event data. That way you can have generic MIDI processors or
> channel filters or whatever without having to list every event type in
> the RDF file.


Event extension should keep it hands out of event contents entirely.
MIDI is already well-defined.


More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list