[PD] plugin~ vs dssi~

Hans-Christoph Steiner hans at at.or.at
Sun Jun 20 15:53:20 CEST 2010

Sounds like a good plan.  I was unaware of the difference between  
plugin~ and dssi~.  The last piece of the equation is distributing  
easy-to-use binaries and making it easy to load and use plugins :)


On Jun 20, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Jamie Bullock wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> I just read the recent thread regarding the plugin~ external, and  
> the regrettable problems Kim was having getting a working plugin in  
> host in Pd.
> One of the problems here is that plugin~ has a subset of the  
> functionality of dssi~, but yet the 2 projects are still maintained  
> in parallel, with AFAICT no real advantage.
> I can only guess the reasons dssi~ is not now the de facto standard  
> for LADSPA and DSSI hosting in Pd:
> 	- it has a dependency on liblo
> 	- people assume that dssi~ only hosts DSSI plugins, not realising  
> that DSSI is built on LADSPA?
> So I propose the following solutions:
> 	- I refactor dssi~ to use the iemnet/mrpeach externals for OSC  
> communications (thus removing the liblo dependency)
> 	- I rename dssi~ to pluginhost~ with a view to extending it to  
> other plugin APIs (VST?) at some later point.
> 	- I include a better help file/documentation (Frank?)
> Any thoughts on this?
> Finally, can I strongly encourage anyone who finds bugs and/or  
> problems with dssi~ to contact me directly, since I read the list  
> infrequently and am much more likely to respond and offer help  
> quickly if I get direct email.
> best,
> Jamie
> --
> http://www.jamiebullock.com
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my  
telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out  
how to use my telephone."  --Bjarne Stroustrup (creator of C++)

More information about the Pd-list mailing list