[LV2] plea to plugin UI devs

[Robin Gareus]

On 03/16/2016 11:13 PM, Albert Graef wrote:
> Of course there are issues due to C++ ABI
> incompatibilities, but most of these will mainly affect commercial plugin
> producers who ship plugins in binary format only.

I would not say that, even with the source around there are plenty of
examples where GNU/Linux distros screw things up while packaging. Or
missing libs/build-dependencies/build-script prevent porting (even to
free systems such as *BSD). The number of possible pitfalls increases
dramatically with the size of the dependencies.  GTK, QT and C++11 are
only the most common ones to mention.


In any case, with LV2 we have a really nice Plugin Standard that is not
only free, but also platform agnostic.

Yet ironically maybe 95% of all LV2 plugins are locked into a tiny niche
due to some unwise choices that we know about since ages but keep repeating.

My point is really: There are lots of great DSP devs 'round here and a
very creative community, but we limit ourselves and I think we can and
should do better.

2c,
robin waving the LV2 flag.


PS. yes I should have mentioned FAUST. There are also other projects
well suited for abstracting all the gory details when creating LV2 or
GUIs e.g. wrl's rutabaga. One might even go as far as mentioning Pd or
SC or Mark's rtosc in this context.
As Filipe pointed out the world isn't black and white either. If you're
aware of all caveats and pitfalls, use whatever works.

While scratching your own itch when writing a LV2 plugin, please keep
the next person in mind who may have the same itch regardless of the
color of their ... lv2-host environment :)