As promised, a few more questions

Hi all,

    I've found a little time to ask you a few questions, if you don't mind.

    First, in one of your mails you said that you had built a 
C-interface for module loading. My question is simple: why build it in 
C? Why did you choose not to create a C++ interface with a class 
instead? Is it for efficiency reasons? I've never worked with dynamic 
loading: is it incompatible with a C++ interface?

    Second: you said that in Gephex 0.5, you "want to move into a more 
functional style of modules because [you] think this makes it easier to 
write effects and also makes the core conceptually simpler and 
optimisations more efficient". I see how it can make the core simpler, 
however I don't really get how it could make optimisations more 
efficient. Plus, as I already said, in my humble opinion it doesn't 
makes it a lot easier to write effects. Since (as I understand it) the 
effects will still be coded in C/C++, it actually makes the programmer's 
job more difficult, since it adds to its task the responsibility of 
making sure that he doesn't keeps any internal states. Or maybe I get it 
wrong and all of the effects will be coded in Scheme; but in this case I 
don't grasp how you could keep all of it efficient and I don't see 
what's the purpose of frei0r.

    If some of you feel like it, I'd be much interested in having your 
ideas on how we could cooperate before wednesday evening: I'll meet the 
other Drone members at that time and it would be interesting if we could 
discuss about these.

    Bis spät,

    J.S.