As a learning exercise, I made a LADSPA plugin that adds its inputs. I figured it would be reasonable to call such a thing &#39;+&#39;. Some plugin hosts don&#39;t like that (I was less surprised by the ones that could not handle the name &#39;&lt;&#39;). This is the LADSPA_Descriptor.Label property. ladspa.h says &quot;Labels must not contain white-space characters.&quot;. Is it unreasonable to expect to be able to have symbols as plugin labels, or parts of plugin labels? So this is more of a &quot;what do you think&quot; then a right/wrong answer kind of thing.<br>
<br>Also, though ladspa.h does not say I cannot write my plugin library in such a way as to create resources shared by all the instances of my plugins within one host (say, a shared OSC connection?), would that be acceptable? Would that break hosts? What about per plugin GUI? If I just made a Makefile variable for a GUI to launch for a ladspa plugin, if I did not want the overhead of the full DSSI interface (or if I wanted to use the plugin in a non DSSI compatible host), would that be beyond the pale for a LADSPA plugin?<br>
<br>Also, now that GMPI seems all but officially dead, does anyone think DSSI will be supplanted (or &quot;disposed of&quot;, as its name would imply)? What is the general developer feeling regarding LADSPA/DSSI/LV2? I leave VST out of this list, because I don&#39;t think Linux distros can even legally distribute vst.h.<br>