linuxaudio.org

On 29/03/11 02:59 PM, Tim Goetze wrote:

quoted text
> [Philipp �berbacher]

>

>

>> Excerpts from Stefano D'Angelo's message of 2011-03-28 22:59:46 +0200:

>>

>>> This means, if you change the port signature and maintain the same

>>> UniqueID, we would have incompatibilities in the LV2 world. If you

>>> create a new plugin or don't touch ports, instead, everything's fine.

>>>

>>> Stefano

>>>

>> I'd say you'd even have incompatibilities in LADSPA world. Even fixes in

>> LADSPA plugins would sometimes need a new ID (This was discussed a while

>> ago regarding a LADSPA that has an unintuitive port order).

>>

> Lacking sufficient knowledge of all the LADSPA hosts out there, I'm

> unable to judge how many will cope with the addition of a port to an

> existing plugin and how many will not.

>    

/Adding/ a port is probably fine, since hosts can just use the default

value or connect it to silence.
However, "adding" here really means "appending": the new ports must be

added on to the end of the ports (by index). Definitely do NOT change

existing indices for ports, that will definitely break a lot of things

in horrible ways! It's not even possible to properly cope with that

situation.
Cheers,
-dr
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-dev mailing list

Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev