On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 23:58 +0200, Leonard "paniq" Ritter wrote:
> Ok, some thoughts about the headerfile:
[snip]
> after reading this i do not see why a new ladspa header is required.
> there are barely any changes in 2. i think this is going to become more
> confusing than helpful, especially since it will not be possible to load
> ladspa 1+2 plugins in the same host with ease (yes, people do not like
> to fix orphaned code and recompile binaries, imagine!).
You are completely missing the entire point of LADSPA2. All the
unecessary data has been removed from the header file (ie the plugin
code).
Look at the example plugin's code, it will be painfully obvious what the
advantage is.
-DR-
Received on Wed Apr 26 08:15:06 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 26 2006 - 08:15:06 EEST