On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 11:53 +0000, James Morris wrote: > On 4 March 2011 11:33, Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:30 AM, James Morris <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> But if multiple UIs are possible, validation effort is duplicated. > > > > duplication never hurt anyone, much. especially since each instance > > might differ in the view of what the limits are. > > > > What about if the engine depends on the limits to be properly set in > order for it to function correctly?
Make your plugin robust. Plugins should not crash no matter what the host throws at them. In theory, yes, we could define a bunch of strict rules and such to remove this burden from plugin authors, but in practise that road leads to flaky software. > I suppose the obvious answer is to put this validation in the set and > get methods of the engine. > > I just wondered if someone could define a case where it would be in > the set/get methods of engine, and another case where it should be in > the UI. The reason to do it in the "UI" (actually host) is performance. <insert famous quote about premature optimization here> -dr _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
