[LAD] LV2 adoption

[Steve Harris]

On 23 Jan 2008, at 10:10, Krzysztof Foltman wrote:

> Steve Harris wrote:
>
>> To my mind it's better for us to develop a large suite of tools  
>> and  plugins to demonstrate the viability and advantages before we go
>
> I think we indeed need lots of testing tools - like debugging hosts/ 
> plugins spiked with lots of pre/postcondition checks, or even some  
> validity checking libraries that could be easily inserted  
> (#ifdef'ed) into "real" hosts/plugins, to check plugin/host  
> behaviour in "real world".
>
> I recall what incomplete/buggy standard implementations did in Buzz  
> and VST worlds, and it'd be nice to have some tools to prevent  
> repeating the same nightmare.
>
> As for "who will write it", I guess it can't be a single-person  
> project, because just one person is unlikely to come up with *all*  
> the useful checks (and it would be incredibly boring anyway).

Hah, you're right, though there are some people who have a knack for,  
and get a kick out of writing conformance tools.

Like Nick Lamb, who wrote Demolition for LADSPA: http://devel.tlrmx.org/audio/demolition/

I don't think anyone ever wrote a set up conformance plugins for  
LADSPA that measured host conformance though - that would also be  
useful.

- Steve