Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA Finalisation Deadline
From: Juhana Sadeharju (kouhia_AT_nic.funet.fi)
Date: Sun Mar 26 2000 - 21:10:22 EEST
>From: "Richard W.E. Furse" <richard_AT_muse.demon.co.uk>
>
>I'm proposing finalisation of LADSPA version 1. This would give a solid
>baseline for programming, possible further development and/or possible use
>within MuCoS.
What I write below might already been fixed. At last when I read you
LADSPA was simply ruined. I have some latency in mailing.
About this precisions issues and LADSPA:
I simply don't understand why it is so difficult to include different
types to LADSPA.
There would not be any problems because we would have plug-ins
which converts from one type to another if needed. I don't support the
idea of Benno that some code would be automatically inserted to host
for conversion. If one writes a plug-in set which needs to use 256-bit
numbers, the one would also provide the needed conversion plug-ins.
(Or writes that 24-channel interleaved audio plug-in.)
Task of making sure the plug-ins fits together is of a flow network
builder, not the engine's. Therefore we could use strings for the types
in case one wants to add new types without the need to update LADSPA.
If one has a plug-in which is cabable of processing many types,
user explicitly uses the conversion plug-ins to choose the appropriate
type if it is different from the input signal type. Otherwise the input
signal type counts.
A plug-in will output the type what is at input (except some special
plug-ins).
Transmission lines between plug-ins transmit byte streams, so, anything
can go through.
Do I miss something here?
Juhana
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Mar 26 2000 - 21:36:50 EEST