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 - 14:05:33 EET
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 12:47:32 +0100, Jan Weil wrote:
> Quoting Fons' proposal:
> If there are any ports using LADSPA_HINT_SWITCHED, then their
> label strings follow after all port names (i.e. the port names
> remain in their normal place). In this case the range of valid
> indices is increased by the number of labels defined. The labels
> are not included in PortCount.
>
> Label strings follow after all port names.
> Why shouldn't you be able to ignore them?
Imagine you have:
enumerated port, no integer hint
then
enumerated port, with integer hint
If you ignore the enumeration for the first one, then you will get wrong
results when you try to parse the second.
> Wouldn't you agree that if we come to the point where we can't ignore a
> hint we have a serious problem?
No, beacuse if you ignore them all its fine.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Mar 10 2004 - 14:06:41 EET