A few people have got LADSPA support working on Windows already. After all,
it's all ANSI C except for the dlopen() mechanism which can be replaced
trivially with the DLL mechanism. The suggestion to drop the L has been
made, but I think it should stay.
However, some might see it a bit rude to take their Linux plugins and
compile them for Windows and because of this I've not encouraged spread to
other platforms. What do folk think? I wouldn't mind for my CMT plugins.
--Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ellis
Breen
Sent: 27 July 2001 15:40
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Wrappers and LAAGA
I was wondering whether it was possible to implement LADSPA on non-Linux
OSes, and if so, whether it has been done? For example, without breaking any
licenses (by clever dynamic linking if necessary) could a DirectX, VST, MAS
or TDM wrapper/adapter be written for it (if any of these provide a superset
of the LADSPA API), thus allowing LADSPA plugins to run just about anywhere?
When/if a wrapper workably implements the proposed LADSPA GUI API could this
provide an incentive for developers to switch to LADSPA as a 'write-once,
run-anywhere' solution, maybe even not requiring recompilation for
non-architectural ports? If so, should such software should be kept under
wraps (boom boom) until then to prevent open-source software escaping into
the Win/Mac world, considering that if it can be done, someone will probably
eventually do it (and that LADSPA plugins being more modular in their nature
will work a lot better without the baggage of a wrapper or adapter, ie, in
Linux hosts designed from the ground up for LADSPA, therefore changing the
slope of the playing field somewhat)? If not LADSPA, how about MAIA, or a
superclass thereof?
[...]
