d at drobilla.net
Tue Feb 28 15:54:28 PST 2012
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 19:12 +0100, Stefan Kersten wrote:
> On 28.02.12 03:47, David Robillard wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 17:12 -0500, David Robillard wrote:
> >> Since we've unfortunately overloaded "property", I'm calling this the
> >> port's "relation".
> > Actually, on second though, is this a "parameter"?
> .sounds much more accessible than "relation".
Yeah, the idea hadn't quite fully formed in my head yet. It's really
"property" but that's too overloaded. I think people will guess what
"parameter" meann pretty accurately.
> > "Parameter" =
> > * Identified by URI, has a "value" of any type (one per URI per plugin)
> > * Is a property the plugin "understands"
> > * Likely to be saved in plugin state
> > * Can get/set by sending a message
> > * Can be expressed in a control port
> so this would not necessarily be tied to a port?
Right. Mainly, you could set/get one via messages (via an event port)
as well. Among other things, this means you could create them
dynamically. I like that this is tied in with ports so the abstract
concept of a "parameter" is not tied to the logistics of ports or
More information about the Devel