On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 18:48 +0100, james morris wrote: > On 13/8/2009, "David Robillard" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 10:08 +0100, james morris wrote: > >> I was trying to point to the question of: Why base the replication of a > >> control port on the replication of the audio ports? The audio port > >> replication is based on the number of channels, so base the replication > >> of the control port (if it is to be replicated) on that also. > > > >.... the audio port replication IS the "number of channels". > > > >> So we have two new port properties: one to say this port should always be > >> replicated - audio ports would use this - and another to say that this > >> port can be replicated but does not have to be. The matching of counts > >> is implied because there's no sane reason why port replication counts > >> would not match. > > > >You are (falsely) assuming the replication is the same across the entire > >plugin. i.e. there is no global "number of channels" value > > > > I'm assuming the only ports to be replicated are those which have say a > multiPort property. I don't see why replication would not be the same > in a plugin instance, across all ports with that property.
Because larger plugins can have several completely different signal paths. Synthesis and effects, or several channels on a mixer, or... -dr _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
