On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 01:12, Steve Harris wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 12:36:54 +0100, Jan Weil wrote: > > On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 21:52, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > > > /* This hint must be used only together with LADSPA_HINT_INTEGER. > > > > [snip explanation on multiway switches] > > > > > #define LADSPA_HINT_SWITCHED 0x400 > > > > Since this is a special hint which implies LADSPA_HINT_INTEGER, > > shouldn't this be made clear to the plugin coder explicitly? > > > > #define LADSPA_HINT_SWITCHED (0x400 | LADSPA_HINT_INTEGER) > > > > FWIW the very fact that one hint implies another hint makes me feel a > > little uncomfortable. > > I think it would be safer to /not/ enforce this and require the plugin > authors to explicitly say LADSPA_HINT_INTEGER as well to make sure they > know what there doing. > > Hosts could reject any plugin that has LADSPA_HINT_SWITCHED and not > LADSPA_HINT_INTEGER.
Well, since these are _hints_ I'd suggest to just ignore LADSPA_HINT_SWITCHED in this case. Otherwise a simpler minded host (applyplugin) might let you use this plugin without problems while your sophisticated pro app refuses to touch it. Or is this what you'd expect? Jan
