Re: [LAD] [RFC] LADSPA 1.2

2009/6/18 Fons Adriaensen <fons@email-addr-hidden>:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 08:53:27PM +0200, Tim Goetze wrote:
>
>> [Fons Adriaensen]
>> >
>> >This makes is backwards compatible, as no new field is required
>> >in the descriptor struct.
>>
>> AFAICS, binary compatibility is not compromised by an expanded
>> descriptor struct, as long as additional members are appended to the
>> struct.
>
> This is not strictly true. Indexing an array of such structs
> will fail if the code doing it is generated by a compiler that
> didn't use the exact size.
>
> But that will indeed not to happen, as hosts are assumed to use
> ladspa_descriptor() provided by the plugin.

Note: a weird host could copy make a copy of the descriptors (I see
nothing claiming this should not happen in the header file), thus ABI
would be broken... this could maybe happen in LADSPA hosts written in
non-C languages (why does Java come to my mind?).

Stefano
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Fri Jun 19 00:15:07 2009