6 Dec
2010
6 Dec
'10
2:11 p.m.
Hi, and thanks for the feedback.
My own gut feeling on this is that you'd be better
off figuring out
how to do this in the context of Faust, which already does a important
subset of what you are describing, though notably without (I think)
the LLVM part.
Surely a contribution to the discussion by the Faust people would
be welcome; and even more than to the discussion :->. By the way, they
do something with LLVM, but i do not know exactly what (Faust is included
in the list of projects using LLVM).
I think the interest, if any, would be in having a *low* level
library generic enough to be used by multiple applications, so
to factor the work. It may be that an existing project have internally
a large part of the needed code, though.
Note also that hosts which run plugins at the level of
LADSPA/LV2,
VST, AU, DSSI etc are unlikely to be easy candidates for any
cross-plugin optimization.
I was actually talking about two different context, reusing existing
binaries, and having cross plugin optimisations for native plugins.
But, if the plugins are compiled with a different compilation chain
(using the LLVM compiler producing LLVM byte code, so introducing a different
binary format for them), than cross plugin optimisation is possible also for
existing plugins like a LADSPA plugin.
Would that be worthwhile ? Difficult to know for sure, but it is an interesting
subject to explore.
Maurizio