> > On the second point, here's a set of diffs for the new version of ladspa.h.
> > Do these look alright? I'd have preferred to put the default values in the
> > hint structure, but that would have changed its size and broken
> > backwards-compatibility.
> 
> So no complaints then?  When does this become offical?  (When can people
> download a 1.1 ladspa.h file?)

I'm a relative newcomer here, but my initial reaction was "that's all?".
I'm all for incremental, backwards-compatible changes, but sometimes things
get over-engineered for the sake of compatibility.  

For the record, I am working on an alternative (perhaps wrapper is the best
description) API that does what LADSPA does, and more, in what I view as a
simpler and more cohesive way.  I'll post it for shits-and-giggles when it
is ready.  The idea being that you can write a very simple plugin that
handles all the complexity of LADSPA compatibility, polyphony, etc. and
still presents a simple API to the host.  

<shrug> maybe it is useless, but I like the problem set.

Tim

p.s. - I've tentatively called it OPI - Open Plugin Interface.  and 'cuz I
always liked Andy Griffith :)

Reply via email to