8 Feb
2003
8 Feb
'03
6:54 p.m.
On Saturday 08 February 2003 07.41, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > 2) Do we need a run_adding() form of run()?
[...first "yes" - then "*man*, this is messy!"...]
I've never seen such a fast about-face! :)
*hehe* Well, it's because I keep seeing new parts of the picture. It's
easy when you think about simple FX plugins, but as plugins get
bigger and more complex, things become less obvious.
I'm not saying that run_adding() is useless, but rather that to be of
any use for anything but the simplest cases, it has to be done in a
different way from what we (I?) initally intended. A separate run()
call and a global output gain control won't be of much use in plugins
with lots of outputs.
So it is still undecided, then.
I guess so... I think we should have some optional feature like this,
but I don't think a separate run_adding() will do much good. I used
to think it was only about small/fast plugins, but it's not. It's
about cycles/output.
//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate
.- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------.
| Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. |
| RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. |
`---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -'
--- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---