Subject: Re: [Just Talk] Re: [linux-audio-user] Why we need graphic designers
From: Dave Griffiths (dave@pawfal.org)
Date: Thu Jan 23 2003 - 19:28:19 EET
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:59:21 +0000 (GMT), Mike Rawes wrote
> --- Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 01:20:34 +0000, Mike Rawes wrote:
> > > > > Module wiring: The biggest improvement is to implement sub-patches
> > > > > [yes, I know there are plans for this in SSM :] - that way you can
> > > > > hide a lot of detail in a single module.
> > > >
> > > > That depends on your building style. I hardly ever use sub patches, my
> > > > patches have too much interrealtion.
> > >
> > > True. But then you can just not use the sub-patches! They do have their
> > > uses - another good one is DX-style FM - building a single operator uses
> > > about half a dozen modules. Being able to wrap this into a single module
> > > called 'DX Operator' has a certain appeal. I suppose it depends on how
> > > you work. It might be easier to just write a DX Op LADSPA plugin!
> >
> > I was disputing your statememt that its the biggest improvement. I think
> > the biggest impriovement is combining the patching and parameter control
> > UIs. OTOH an FM synth built from first principles is a good example,
> > though most modular synths would/should have a single module to do that.
>
> OK. 'The biggest' -> 'A big' :) So we've got two big improvements:
> Sub patches
I'm still not entirely convinced, but like I said - it's worth trying it out,
and I think it's the best way to incorporate polyphony (duplicating subpatches
instead of the whole thing)
> and combined wiring/control UI (with the option of
> hiding wires).
I used to have the plugin windows inserted into the patch window, it's quite
easy to do. Possibly with a button to "pop" them out of the widgets into top
level windows, or hide them - which would shrink the module back to it's
original state.
The only thing I'm not sure about is handling the other modules positions when
they change size.
I've kind of got used to how it is (I've implemented module name changing BTW
- so you can correlate module and it's control window easier) but there is
nothing wrong with experimenting. I'd also like to try putting some window
placement code into the current scheme, like that Ion WM - it's perfect.
Probably time to take this off LAD I think.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 19:54:27 EET