On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 10:45:50AM -0500, David Robillard wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 23:09 +0100, fons@email-addr-hidden wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 12:52:52PM -0500, David Robillard wrote:
> >
> > > This wouldn't be an LV2 plugin at all.
> >
> > In spirit, no. But technically it would be a
> > perfectly conforming plugin.
>
> Huh? An LV2 plugin in the code sense is a shared library with a
> lv2_descriptor function that returns a struct LV2_Descriptor (just like
> LADSPA).
Yes. Please rewind a few messages and read again.
The idea was an extension that requires the host
to obtain a pointer to a C++ object from the plugin.
This C++ object (derived from some base class which
is part of the extension definition) then provides
all other information (ports, process method, etc.).
This would bypass all LV2 methods, but still be an
LV2 plugin.
Ciao,
--
FA
Io lo dico sempre: l'Italia è troppo stretta e lunga.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sun Nov 8 20:15:06 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Nov 08 2009 - 20:15:06 EET