On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 6:23 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 05/16/2014 07:34 AM, Miller Puckette wrote: > > I think that would work (if Pd was compiled with the "thread lock" > enabled) > > but the two wouldn't be able to run simultaneously; > > the problem is, that if someone made Pd into a (e.g.) VST-plugin (and > judging from the responses to your announcement mail, a lot of people > definitely would like that to happen), then you cannot make any > assumptions about how the host will deal with multiple instances of that > plugin. the host may choose to run all it's plugins in parallel :-( > > But for now, if you want to make a Pd wrapper VST plugin, you can just put locks around all pd calls. I think this first step is a good one. I'm not convinced it's necessary to do the next step, but let's see how this works first. At least it's nice to be able to send and receive pd messages between instances easily. If you really want to run things in parallel, you can always just run Pd in a new process, which is much safer too.
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
