4 Mar
2004
4 Mar
'04
3:22 p.m.
[Dave Robillard]
On Thu, 2004-03-04 at 12:28, Tim Goetze wrote:
we're not. this is just to overcome the shortcomings of LADSPA
as we have it now. what precisely is part of this extension hasn't
even been discussed yet.
tim
[Steve Harris]
Then we'd be solving the problem of relying on a complex external
library by just moving all that complexity into LADSPA. Mostly default values. RDF defaults for LADSPA
predate ladspa.h default
hints, which are a hack.
it would be simple to extend LADSPA to do whatever we want while
keeping binary compatibility i think:
#define LADSPA_PROPERTY_HARD_RT_CAPABLE 0x4
...
/* if set, indicates that the Descriptor structure is version 2 or
* above. if not set, a host must assume a version 1.x plugin.
*/
#define LADSPA_PROPERTY_HAVE_VERSION 0x8
so at the end of the version 1 descriptor struct we can add fields
galore, starting, obviously, with a version field. of course plugins
must not rely on version 2 features if they are intended to work with
pre-version 2 hosts. To me this is a mess. It should be perfectly
possible to extend the port
descriptors in such a way that things like preset names, scale ticks,
units etc. are available from there.
It would be, but its hard to keep binary compatibility and wouldnt it be
better to just have one extensible metadata format that you can use for
ports descriptions, scales, defaults, and presets?