[LV2] Bikeshed: Conventional names for event control ports

[David Robillard]

On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 08:55 +0100, Nick Lanham wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 15:56:59 -0500
> David Robillard <d at drobilla.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> > The purpose of these ports is control of any and all plugin settings
> > via messages, and responding to those messages (which will eventually
> > include parameters as well).  The ideal names are those most likely to
> > have people correctly guess this intent.  I'd like to come up with a
> > nice single word pair to avoid "Control In" and "Control Out" (though
> > perhaps this is misguided?)
> 
> "message" and "reply"?  Perhaps a bit too general to guess the
> intent, but it will probably cover all use cases for the port(s).

"Message" is alright, but "reply" is a bit too narrow in scope as
Gabriel mentioned.

Implementing 'file controls' (via messages) I just discovered a related
problem: the *channel* that carries this stuff needs a name too (for the
designation).  This is sort of a 'tag' that goes on both the input and
output.  "Control" is by far the best name, IMO.  So much so that I
think I will just ignore the sort-of-clash with control ports and use it
anyway...

-dr
 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.lv2plug.in/pipermail/devel-lv2plug.in/attachments/20130109/67e437dd/attachment-0002.pgp>