Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA extension - Formal proposal.
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Mar 10 2004 - 13:30:24 EET
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 12:21:17 +0100, Jan Weil wrote:
> I've been using my favourite LADSPA plugin AudioTwingTwang in Sweep
> 0.8.2 for a long time. I have to admit it's UI looks a little odd but I
> really love this effect.
> Now I'm trying to record some of my music which no longer fits into my
> computer's RAM so I was considering Ardour but - alas - Ardour's LADSPA
> support is not as good as I had expected. Whenever I try to load
> AudioTwingTwang Ardour says something about a 'violated interface spec'.
> So I'm sorry to say that but I'm very disappointed. I'll go back to
In that case there is a bug in AudioTwingTwang, its as simple as that. I
have no idea why people think they can get away with releasing
non-conformant plugins *cough* ;) In many ways its worse than release
buggy apps, because it can bring down other peoples software.
Valid 1.0 LADSPA plugins are also valid 1.1 plugins. 1.2 should follow
this trend.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Mar 10 2004 - 13:32:26 EET