On 03/04/2011 03:40 PM, Stefano D'Angelo wrote: > 2011/3/4 Olivier Guilyardi <[email protected]>:
>> But LV2 is extensible. So what I think is that in addition to the extensions >> which imply UI/engine separation (and I understand that it's important in >> many >> cases), there should be a DoWhatTheFuckYouWantInYourPlugin extension ;) >> >> With such plugins, restoring/saving state would rely on passing a blob in >> addition to restoring/saving the control ports values. There would be no such >> thing as UI/engine separation. The plugin would be self contained. And >> hopefully >> it would integrate nicely with other extensions such as midi. > > Actually control ports do not define the state alone, the state also > includes plugin-specific data (the stuff the LV2_Handle thing should > point to) - and that is generally a binary blob anyway (unless you do > some other kind of storing/restoring, like with key/value pairs, > etc.). Thanks for clarifying that.. But does this mean that LV2 already support what I explain /with/ existing extensions? >> I think that this extension, since it would only imply simple but powerful >> primitives, would give a lot of freedom to developers who want that, and at >> the >> same time be rather easy to maintain. > > Why do you hate yourself so much? > > /me buys popcorn and waits for Dave to bash you hard. :-) I'm sure he wouldn't. Otherwise, my patch to remove this glib dependency may never be submitted ;) -- Olivier _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
