On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 04:57:07PM +0100, Alfons Adriaensen wrote: > The purpose of my proposition is to enable a plugin writer (if he/she wishes > to do so) to detect when the plugin is used in this way, and maybe optimise > his code. For example, control rate computations (which can be elaborate and > even more complicated than the audio rate code) could be shared by all voices.
I see, but I still dislike the idea FWIW :) > I have some plugins that are able to create their own GUI (by using a shared > library that makes them look like a single client to the X-server, and that > also provides a standard set of widgets). Clearly, all instances that belong > to the same module should share the same GUI. The proposed way of using > the standard 'lifecycle' functions enables them to do this correctly. This is a valid point, and and interesting technique, does it work with arbitrary host toolkits? How do you bypass the hosts connection to the X server? - Steve