> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Paul Davis
> Sent: 01 October 2001 17:32
> To: Richard Guenther
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADMEA revisited (was: LAAGA and
> supporting programs)
[...]
> However, as I pointed out yesterday, and as Richard himself notes,
> there is no particular problem imagining an API with more flexibility
> like LADMEA "containing" "exchanges" like JACK.
[...]

Yep, absolutely. The reasons I'm not in a state of panic over about
proliferation of a subset API is that it shouldn't be hard to retrofit a
JACK exchange with LADMEA exchange support in the same way that it isn't
hard to fit LADSPA support to a host. It would be a bit more of a pain to
retrofit clients, but a generic JACK->LADMEA wrapper library probably
shouldn't be too hard to write although there would be a small performance
hit.

I'd probably be arguing more if I had time to build a decent LADMEA SDK now,
but this is unlikely unless I get more bored at work (this frees up
brainspace). ANY movement towards cross-app comms now is good and I don't
want people doing nothing waiting for things to resolve.

Advice to client coders: read the LADMEA API - if you like it, give me some
feedback. If you don't understand it, hassle me. Otherwise, go with JACK: if
this really gives you everything you need it won't be backbreaking to
retrofit later on (when I get really bored ;-).

--Richard

Reply via email to