Tim Hockin wrote:
> > simple, yes. useless, not even close.
>
> No need to get on the defensive, really. I don't deny the usefulness or
> importance of LADSPA _AT_ALL_. It is, by and large, a very good system.
>
> Ysh - I have some different ideas that I want to play out, that is all.
W
> useless? steve's set plus ardour as the host (or possibly other apps)
> provides me with a very rich working environment. there are very few
> issues i have with LADSPA right now that are not shared by VST (for
> example). the main ones would be the lack of string parameters and the
> inability
>> second, as has been said many times here, the "S" in LADSPA stands for
>> "Simple". LADSPA was never intended to be a complete plugin API. it
>
>right, but sufficiently simple borders on useless.
useless? steve's set plus ardour as the host (or possibly other apps)
provides me with a very rich
> second, as has been said many times here, the "S" in LADSPA stands for
> "Simple". LADSPA was never intended to be a complete plugin API. it
right, but sufficiently simple borders on useless.
> third, calling LADSPA "over-engineered" strikes me as similar to
I wasn't referring to LADSPA, but
>> So no complaints then? When does this become offical? (When can people
>> download a 1.1 ladspa.h file?)
>
>I'm a relative newcomer here, but my initial reaction was "that's all?".
>I'm all for incremental, backwards-compatible changes, but sometimes things
>get over-engineered for the sake o
> > On the second point, here's a set of diffs for the new version of ladspa.h.
> > Do these look alright? I'd have preferred to put the default values in the
> > hint structure, but that would have changed its size and broken
> > backwards-compatibility.
>
> So no complaints then? When does thi
On Sat, 18 May 2002, Richard W.E. Furse wrote:
> On the second point, here's a set of diffs for the new version of ladspa.h.
> Do these look alright? I'd have preferred to put the default values in the
> hint structure, but that would have changed its size and broken
> backwards-compatibility.
S
Ryan Mitchley wrote:
>
> Has anyone had experience using or developing for these cards under
> Linux, particularly the Audiotrak Maya and Inca series? Experiences under
> other platforms are welcome, too . . .
Do you happen to have one? I would like to know if it's based on ICE1712 as
I suspec
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 01:40:35 -0400, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2002, Steve Harris wrote:
>
> > http://inanna.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~swh/Plugins/RDF/example.rdf
>
> Looks very interesting. So this rdf stuff would all be ancillary to the
> plugin itself? i.e. hosts could operate without it,
On Mon, 20 May 2002, Steve Harris wrote:
> http://inanna.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~swh/Plugins/RDF/example.rdf
Looks very interesting. So this rdf stuff would all be ancillary to the
plugin itself? i.e. hosts could operate without it, but perhaps not as
well? What's the real idea here?
> There would als
http://inanna.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~swh/Plugins/RDF/example.rdf
I just knocked it up quickly, so it not neccesarily the best
representation, but it shows roughly what it would look like.
If you want to see it rendered, go to
http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/ and put the URL obove into the Parse URI
bo
Has anyone had experience using or developing for these cards under Linux,
particularly the Audiotrak Maya and Inca series? Experiences under other
platforms are welcome, too . . .
Ryan
12 matches
Mail list logo
