Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Mustajuuri -> LADSPA plugins.
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Mar 28 2001 - 17:13:35 EEST
On Wed, Mar 28, 2001 at 08:43:14AM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
> Since LADSPA has nothing to say about the qualities of the many varied
> toolkits available for the X Window System, its inappropriate to
> connect LADSPA to a particular toolkit. Ergo, its not possible for a
> plugin to use a particular toolkit and expect it to work.
>
> We did discuss the idea of providing alternate GUI's. Then, if the
> host was running, say, GTK+, it could check to see if the plugin had a
> GTK+ GUI and use it. Or it could use the XML spec, or it could refuse
> to implement a GUI for the plugin at all. I quite like this idea,
> myself.
I have several concerns about this, largly cos I don't know much about how
X works at the low level. Can the plugin find out what toollkit the host is
using? And, assuming that the host is using, say GTK+, what happens when
the plugin tries to open a GTK window? Will it just inherit the hosts
connection to the server?
Is there anything to prevent the plugin from spawning a second process
which has its own connection to the server, but is linked to the process
via some sort of IPC? I'm guessing this would be frowned on though ;)
Lastly, LADSPA plugins creating thier own GUIs kind of puts a stop to host
automation (I think), if the plugin receives the UI events directly then
the host knows nothing about it, and I can't think of a transparent way of
the plugin communicating the parameter changes to the host.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Apr 07 2001 - 15:39:05 EEST