Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] audio application mixing/routing arch
From: Erik Steffl (esteffl_AT_pbi.net)
Date: Fri Mar 31 2000 - 02:32:20 EEST
David Slomin wrote:
>
> Paul Barton-Davis wrote:
>
> > Clients/servers: we've adopted the terminology that a client does not
> > run in the same address space as the server...
>
> My mistake, terminology-wise. I meant to say, "shouldn't there be a
> single, standard, daemon-style host, and everything else is a plugin"?
> When I say "daemon", I really mean it... no GUI at all, and providing
> absolutely no functionality of its own, other than hosting the
> plugins.
yes! do one thing and do it well.
doing any kind of signal processing (except of data conversion:-) in
host would be basically duplicating the functionality of plugins...
> > But notice, there's no technical reason why one host cannot be a
> > plugin to another host.
>
> Technically, I agree with you. In terms of conceptual cleanness, I
> heartily disagree. An HDR is a big program. A soft-synth is a
> big program. <Insert your pet project here> is also a big program.
> They're all peers, so none should be made subordinate to the others.
> However, if they are all equally dependent on the host daemon, then
> the design stays clean, and nobody gets insulted.
well, once you start to do the distributed sound processing you want
to have a daemon running on each computer, I guess. I wonder how that
would go (but we're getting to the area of data bus here)... are the
hosts one different computers plugins to each other?
erik
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Mar 31 2000 - 03:25:52 EEST