Re: [LAD] Portable user interfaces for LV2 plugins.

On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 08:56 +1300, Jeff McClintock wrote:
> > From: Paul Davis <paul@email-addr-hidden>
> > Subject: Re: [LAD] Portable user interfaces for LV2 plugins.
>
> > VST3 allows the GUI to run in a different process?
>
> " The design of VST 3 suggests a complete separation of processor and edit
> controller by implementing two components. Splitting up an effect into these
> two parts requires some extra efforts for an implementation of course.
> But this separation enables the host to run each component in a different
> context. It can even run them on different computers. Another benefit is
> that parameter changes can be separated when it comes to automation. While
> for processing these changes need to be transmitted in a sample accurate
> way, the GUI part can be updated with a much lower frequency and it can be
> shifted by the amount that results from any delay compensation or other
> processing offset."

I would just like to point out that many/most of the movers and shakers
in this community have been advocating (often with much opposition) a
full plugin/UI split for years. I guess now that the commercial guys
have finally gotten around to it the stupid arguments (e.g. that it's
not needed because VST or whatever doesn't have it) go away. Hooray.

For the record: It's now official that the old VST way was garbage, and
a complete plugin <=> UI split is an obvious requirement, not
unrealistic idealism or a topic at all up for debate.

It's not always us playing catch-up :)

-dr

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Fri Mar 4 04:15:02 2011