8 Nov
2009
8 Nov
'09
5:26 p.m.
On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 20:59 +0000, Chris Cannam wrote:
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Chris Cannam
<cannam(a)all-day-breakfast.com> wrote:
Can't really do anything about plugins that crash(*), for whatever
reason. I don't think extensions increase this likelihood.
We just need tools to aggressively test plugins and find this stuff.
-dr
(* at least in realtime...)
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Paul Davis
<paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
Also -- are you, like me, bored with LADSPA plugins crashing your host
in tedious, obvious ways? How about an LV2 plugin that expects a
particular extension but doesn't really need it so marks it as
optional, then turns out not to have been tested without it -- and,
wouldn't you know, every host except yours happens to support that
extension? Wouldn't you love to be the first host to run the untested
code path in production?
(I freely admit that this is a sort of FUD, but it happens to be a FUD
that is playing on my own mind at the moment. Reassure me.) [X] This plugin was discovered but can't be
used without hacking this
host and recompiling because its uses an extension that isn't
currently supported.
That kind of PITA? :)
That kind of PITA, for every new plugin that is installed, but perhaps
the bigger problem is what to do about optional extensions. The
plugin may run without them, but for all you know, it may run in a way
that is not really satisfactory for most real users of it. Warn them
at install time and they'll certainly have forgotten by the time the
plugin actually gets used, or at least will be unable to recognise the
symptom.