[LAD] State of Plugin API's

Stefano D'Angelo zanga.mail at gmail.com
Sun Nov 1 09:59:25 UTC 2009

2009/11/1 Patrick Shirkey <pshirkey at boosthardware.com>:
> On 11/01/2009 02:38 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Patrick Shirkey
>> <pshirkey at boosthardware.com>  wrote:
>>     [ ... stuff .... ]
>> the idea occured to me sometime today.
>> "my host supports LV2-E1"
>> "my plugin requires LV2-E2"
>> "this application uses LV2-E<N>"
>> EV<N>  = LV2 core + { extA, extB, extC .. }
>> its not a new idea, i'm just "naming" it.
> That seems fairly logical.
> Not specifically to you but I wonder how would we assign extension
> numbers to that the EV<N> is a unique number?

To me this is nonsense, the best way to do that I can imagine is
assigning one bit position to each extension and sum them up to give
your <N>, but I can already imagine huge unreadable numbers (how many
extensions do we have now? 20?) and probably there's no better way to
do that.

This also clashes IMO with the idea of using URIs for decentralized
extension development (no, please, not unique ids again!)

Anyway, this sounds as a really marginal thing to me... but maybe it's not?



More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list