[PD] plugin~ vs dssi~
kim at anechoicmedia.com
Sun Jun 20 19:42:01 CEST 2010
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.
no worries! I was finally able to figure it out with the help of the list
and again want to thank all who contributed to the dicussion
on how [plugin~] and some other externals are supposed to work
one of my aims here was not only to use the external myself (I'm moving
some of my old Max/MSP patches forward to Pd) but also to help write a
short tutorial for it on the FOSS Pd manual
> 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,
I am also interested in writing a [dssi~] external tutorial but don't
have the bandwidth until next week or so...
but if you have any more recent updated code I'd be happy to compile it
and give it a spin
I'm on 32 bit Ubuntu
> since I read the list infrequently and am much more likely to respond and offer help quickly if I get direct email.
More information about the Pd-list