[fluid-dev] Fluidsynth changes

[Ebrahim Mayat]

> Three points:
> Users of an OSS project are not necessarily what is known as "end  
> users" i.e. people who only want to run an application and have no  
> interest in how it is coded.  In particular, the users I'm thinking  
> of for my project are OSS coders who need an embeddable synthesizer  
> for their own projects.  I hope that by providing a smaller, more  
> powerful, easier-to-use API, they will be better served.
Sounds good.

> This is OSS.  I'm a volunteer.  I code because it's fun, not  
> because I'm paid or because I hope to satisfy the expectations of  
> certain people.  I do hope that others will find my work useful,  
> but if not even one person is interested in my code, or if for lack  
> of time or interest I never finish my project, does it mean my  
> project will have been a waste?  Not in my eyes.  I will have had  
> fun while coding it, and (hopefully) I will have learned something.
Sure, I don't disagree with that.

> Hopefully it will now be clear that the "use" I'm thinking of is  
> actually of the libraries, by other coders, rather than by end users.

Okay, now you have clarified part of your intentions.

> Have you also considered how code transparency might be affected?
>
> Don't know what that means.  If you mean ease of use of the API,  
> then yes, I hope it will be improved.
>
> At the moment, it looks like you want to re-invent the
> wheel because you have certain coding preferences?
>
> In past mails I have tried to explain my technical motivations, and  
> certainly I don't think yours is a fair summary.  I may have failed  
> in explaining myself, but at the moment I'm not interested in  
> trying again.
>
> What would the advantage of MSVC compatibility be for OSS? Is MSVC
> freely available?
>
> You can use certain versions of MSVC free of cost, which is what  
> I'm doing.

Specifics please. Which versions and for which OSes.

> On which OSes can MSVC be used?
>
> On the ones with 90%+ of the user base?
You are being vague again. The user base of what? Does MSVC work on  
Solaris? I doubt that.

> Autotools are freely available and work on a multitude of OSes
> including all the Linux flavors and UNIX OSes.
>
> I actually knew that. On the other hand, many of those OSes won't  
> be able to use Fluidsynth as long as it lacks an audio driver  
> compatible with them.  Fluidsynth has a Windows audio driver.  Does  
> it have one for Solaris?  No?  Then what use is a build system that  
> supports Solaris?

Fluidsynth has been ported to Solaris.  So, you want to build  
fluidsynth as a dll?

> Right, no offence meant.
>
> Excellent.  Sometimes people seem to forget that we are supposed to  
> be doing this for fun.

Absolutely! It may be news to you but the field of Linux audio is  
filled with musicians who are also hackers.

> To my knowledge, C++ is a superset of C so I would imagine that any
> code enhancements that you propose could easily be "translated"  to C
> if all the objects, containers, methods etc. are clearly defined. If
> you know C++ very well, the transition to C in theory would be rather
> effortless.
>
> C++'s features are useful precisely because they can't be simulated  
> in C that easily.  But anyway, I won't be doing that translation;  
> good luck to those who will.

Waiting to see what you are going to come up with.

> Regards,
> Miguel

E