sonigen wrote:mystran wrote:is there some technical objections against GMPI?
I'd object to XML, I think XML is a bloated pile of verbose crap.
LV2 chose 'turtle', I think because of objections to XML. I don't know it, but the purpose is the same as XML.
I'm not 100% sure this is accurate since I only quickly glanced at Jeffs SDK but it looks like it's all C++. That the API is tied to C++ interfaces/classes. This is unacceptable to me, it should be plain C with C++ as an overlay. You make the API from C++ you limit future options, and you make life harder for people who are not using C++.
Agree, although my plugins use C++, GMPI is actually mandated as binary compatible with C (which it is). The C++ is just for me a convenient 'wrapping' of the underlying C interface.
Also, I suspect you have a point about the XML, although it's very quick and easy to type in your parameters etc in XML, it would also be more straight forward for some people to have programmatic specification as an additional option. i.e. the host would call an actual function to get the plugin's number of inputs/outputs/parameters etc. There's no reason the XML couldn't be an optional layer built on top of a more traditional mechanism. What do you think?