30 Mar
2011
30 Mar
'11
4:51 a.m.
On 29/03/11 02:59 PM, Tim Goetze wrote:
[Philipp �berbacher]
/Adding/ a port is probably fine, since hosts can just use the default
value or connect it to silence.
However, "adding" here really means "appending": the new ports must be
added on to the end of the ports (by index). Definitely do NOT change
existing indices for ports, that will definitely break a lot of things
in horrible ways! It's not even possible to properly cope with that
situation.
Cheers,
-dr
Excerpts from Stefano D'Angelo's message
of 2011-03-28 22:59:46 +0200:
Lacking sufficient knowledge of all the LADSPA hosts out there, I'm
unable to judge how many will cope with the addition of a port to an
existing plugin and how many will not.
This means, if you change the port signature and
maintain the same
UniqueID, we would have incompatibilities in the LV2 world. If you
create a new plugin or don't touch ports, instead, everything's fine.
Stefano
I'd say you'd even have incompatibilities in LADSPA world. Even
fixes in
LADSPA plugins would sometimes need a new ID (This was discussed a while
ago regarding a LADSPA that has an unintuitive port order).