Re: [Traverso-devel] Re: Traverso-Routing etc,

[Niklas Klügel]

Peter Hoppe schrieb:
> Sorry that this question hovered in the air for two days now...
>
> I just very recently started to look into Traverso development, so I'm junior 
> junior. In that sense I can't really speak
> very authoritatively. I certainly can't say whether signal/control routing to 
> CLAM should be added to the Traverso
> project - that's for the long standing developers to decide.
>
> However - concerning coding quality, it's /always/ recommendable to work 
> towards high quality code. 'Hackish' designs
> may work and bring results quickly - but you suffer consequences later. Most 
> prominently, you'll find that with
> increasing complexity your architecture suffers from hardening, i.e. it gets 
> more and more inflexible.
>
> Concerning a bridge to CLAM - would it be worthwhile to look into the plugin 
> architecture already provided by Traverso?
> Traverso has got support for LV2 plugins, and whilst I am not very familiar 
> with that technology it sounds like
> something worthwhile to investigate. If that route would be a good one, you'd 
> only need to write an LV2 plugin for
> Traverso which then would somehow interface with the Audio editor. But, as I 
> said, this is just a wild guess. I actually
> had a little look into CLAM, and it seems to be a very flexible sound 
> processing system.
>
> Hope this helps! Your projects sounds interesting!
>
> P
>
>   
Hey,

well, concerning LV2 only support I'd still go with clam because it 
supports ladspa and such stuff already (basically
a wrapped up CLAM-Processing and an additional class-loader) and I am sure
LV2 support is about to come anytime soon. More Midi-Support is about to 
be added as well along with the support of
Control-data that can be arbitrary (i.e. multiple note events in a 
control-stream) and subpatches.
Another plus is that alot of scopes for signals (time and frequency 
domain) and controls-widgets are already available.
For editing the routing I'd basically just rip the NetworkEditor apart 
that comes with the clam-source.

The design itself isnt hackish the implementation might turn out to be 
hackish though. Currently there exist
four base-classes:
CLAMExtAudioIn (Traverso Audiodevice -> clam network)
CLAMExtAudioOut (clam network -> Traverso Audiodevice)
CLAMTraversoMasterBus (clam network main output -> Traverso renderbus)
CLAMTraversoTrack (Traverso Track -> clam network, homefully the other 
way around as well for recording internal audio)

Then there will be new Sheet class, the only modification that would be 
necessary to the original Traverso-source is in Track.*
(leaving out additional commands for editing the network so traverso 
keeps track of the editing).

So long...
Niklas