linuxaudio.org

On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 10:43 +0100, Chris Cannam wrote:

quoted text
> On 18 April 2011 15:50, David Robillard  wrote:

> > On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 19:16 +0100, Chris Cannam wrote:

> >> Library name plus label, for example.

> >

> > That is not guaranteed to be unique, and I know of at least one case in

> > practise where it isn't (various blop packages have a different library

> > name).  There's no reason whatsoever the library name and label of

> > various LADSPA plugin distributions can't be completely different,

> > neither one is an ID.

>

> Indeed, but at least the typical failure case (when the library name

> differs from the expected one) is that the plugin isn't loaded and the

> program can report it, rather than that the wrong plugin is loaded

> silently as occurs with the numerical ID.

Well, sure, a broken ID is... well, broken.  It's not something you can

work around by using an even more broken non-ID.  There's no reason

someone couldn't do the same thing with library name and label.
> > Perhaps the LADSPA spec /should/ use that (or whatever else) as an

quoted text
> > identifier, but it doesn't.

>

> As Stefano pointed out, it does in fact say "plugin types should be

> identified by file and label".  I admit the text is strange given the

> presence of the ID as well.

>

> > file name + label would be a really annoying two-piece identifier

> > anyway, even if it was an actual global identifer.

>

> So make a pseudo URI or something out of it.

>

> Anyway, the situation is a bit unsatisfactory either way and I don't

> think we disagree on that -- probably not much point in arguing about

> the details these days.  A proper URI is a better option in any

> circumstance.

Indeed.
-dr
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-dev mailing list

Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

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