Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and run_adding()
From: Paul Barton-Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Sat Nov 18 2000 - 01:34:31 EET
>> i would really like to once again voice my opinion that run_adding()
>> should be the default mode of operation for all LADSPA plugins.
>
>--votes;
>
>I'm still not convinced. I like to keep things simple. For me, LADSPA
>plugins are loadable functions that process a given range of samples.
>'run_adding()' goes further. It implies that plugins are signal
>routers, etc ...
I have to laugh - here's the exact opposite point of view from
vst-plugins today, about processReplacing, which is the equivalent of
LADSPA run():
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, in a typical polyphonic synth implementing processReplacing, the first
voice replaces the data and additional voices pass over the same buffer
accumulating into it. So, the performance advantage of implementing
processReplacing is probably very small. I bothered to implement it with my
first synths and couldn't tell the difference so haven't bothered with later
ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can both points of view be right ?
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Nov 18 2000 - 02:10:04 EET