[PD] xp review

[илья .d]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 07:55:10PM +0000, Ed Kelly wrote:
> But I have other plans afoot, namely synthcore~. It would be really great if we could organize an API for pd instruments, kind of like the VST api in terms of input-output topology but made of patches in PD. I'd love to know your thoughts on the issue since I intend to code it. It needs to be flexible enough to contain a variety of different parameter lists and modes, but also conform to a specified system so that polyphony and multichannel output can be handled by an external object (such as nqpoly4, but I think we should write our own object for this one)  ;-)
> 
> I think a [message value  isitcontinuous(  model is good, and a [event $1( message could be a note, or a continuous controller change. Mapping the  parameters could be organized so that there is a set parameter list (e.g. amplitude envelope) and then a synth-definable list (e.g. osc modulation of the filter - in cents). also, an external patching system using an SQL database (mogo - I want your sqlite object for linux) based around the metastudio patching system, but a bit more standardised - i.e. you can load patches for one synth, and any parameter lists that match with the present synth's parameter list should be implemented (e.g. filter envelope and paramters, amplitude envelope, global modulation index etc.)
> 
> Anyone want to work with me on this? It needs to be done!
> 
> Ed
>

hi.

i think employing databases in pd for sound related stuff is not a good
idea at all.

why do you want to call it API ?

just say that you have an idea of a set of object with common layout ..
can just apply OSC approach.

in fact everybody seem to have their own approach to organise
abstractions and patches.
it's about style, more then convinience.