Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA extension proposal (quick action wanted)
From: Paul Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Fri Dec 07 2001 - 17:12:20 EET
>using tcpip will simplify implementation. Also we could make use
>of existing technology and simply present a http server to the GUI
>(which in turn can be any browser) either from the LADSPA host
>or directly from each plugin.
the point of LCP is to hide the nature of the communication between
the GUI and the host. that way, the implementation can be changed
without changing either the hosts' or the GUIs' code. if we tried to
use HTTP directly like that, we'd have to use a complete HTTP library,
as soon as we have GUIs that do:
http_put ("/some/url/ladspa?plugin/port/value");
we're locked into http for good. otoh, just typing that line had a
nice feeling to it. was it as nice as
lcp_write (client, plugin, port, value);
? i know which one looks more portable and easy to use ...
the thing about the http case is that it has nice echoes of OSC
without the OSC codebase being involved.
the other problem is that unless http was wrapped, GUIs would still
have to deal with conversion from the char * return type of an
http_get operation back to the actual port value (when reading a port
value).
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Dec 07 2001 - 17:11:05 EET