Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclaimer: *I'm not your target audience*; I don't plan to use your product even if you made it public domain. I never want to agree to an EULA before starting to develop something outside of a professional setting. That's an immediate dealbreaker for me. But even if I did - I wouldn't be able to disassemble or reverse engineer your software (2.2)? Also - why are there so many clauses in the EULA telling me to obey…
We have two user-bases in mind: - end-user developers. This is kind of like being a user of any other language, there's no EULA, nothing to sign, you just write SOUL code, test and debug it with whatever tools (which may themselves have a EULA, but probably nothing heavy) - device and host developers: These are the people writing DAWs, plugins, hardware that can run SOUL code, audio device drivers etc. These are prof…
Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
61–70 of 83 posts
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadly, I’ve been bitten by this before, too, and even if I love the product, I stay away. It isn’t that I don’t trust you or your intentions now, it’s that intentions (and requirements) change. You asked about allaying fears. Personally for me this means actually take-to-the-bank licensing that I could get through a legal audit, even if hypothetical. Talk of “secret sauce” and future closed source and IP licensing of…
Well, as the person who also created JUCE and its license, I can't really argue with that. :) We're very keen to make sure that the end-user developers are totally unencumbered and license-free, because we want lots of people to adopt it. All our licensing is more aimed at device and driver builders - think of it like e.g. openGL - the industry making GL cards and drivers is legal complex, but none of that stuff affe…
Or what if want to write a Vulkan to Metal like MoltenVK?
What if I want to write an interpreter for your bitcode?
What if I want to port soul secret source on top of Apple's Accelerate framework? Would you sue me to oblivion?
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, as the person who also created JUCE and its license, I can't really argue with that. :) We're very keen to make sure that the end-user developers are totally unencumbered and license-free, because we want lots of people to adopt it. All our licensing is more aimed at device and driver builders - think of it like e.g. openGL - the industry making GL cards and drivers is legal complex, but none of that stuff affe…
What if I want to write a software renderer that implements the openGL api? Or what if want to write a Vulkan to Metal like MoltenVK? What if I want to write an interpreter for your bitcode? What if I want to port soul secret source on top of Apple's Accelerate framework? Would you sue me to oblivion?
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#64Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why COM? Well, I hate COM in general, but it was a much better fit for this particular API than flat C functions. It comes with a bunch of C++ helper classes to make it easy to work with, and the resulting code actually ends up looking OK.
It seems odd to spend a bunch of time working on a C++ alternative for audio DSP but to rely on one of the most annoying C++ paradigms to deal with to embed it in anything useful. I don't really care how the library code looks (if the secret sauce is proprietary and closed source anyway, that presents zero value to me as a potential licensing customer!), I care how it functions. I want to script together many soul pa…
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#66Thank you for all the effort, you and your team do inspiring work. After building a pretty big C++ audio app, I think it's time to make a change, and try something a bit kinder (SOUL).
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, at the moment you need to build it. Our ambition is to eventually offer that as a service via soul.dev so you can just download a binary.
Sounds great, if I could just upload a solo file and then have a binary pop out I'd easily pay 10 or $20 a month for the privilege
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#68Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadly, I’ve been bitten by this before, too, and even if I love the product, I stay away. It isn’t that I don’t trust you or your intentions now, it’s that intentions (and requirements) change. You asked about allaying fears. Personally for me this means actually take-to-the-bank licensing that I could get through a legal audit, even if hypothetical. Talk of “secret sauce” and future closed source and IP licensing of…
Well, as the person who also created JUCE and its license, I can't really argue with that. :) We're very keen to make sure that the end-user developers are totally unencumbered and license-free, because we want lots of people to adopt it. All our licensing is more aimed at device and driver builders - think of it like e.g. openGL - the industry making GL cards and drivers is legal complex, but none of that stuff affe…
And good point. I understand where you’re coming from, but... I didn’t understand it when I read the post and blurb(s).
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes - the command-line tool will take a SOUL patch and emit a full, ready-to-build JUCE project that will create all the plugin formats (and a standalone app).
Wait , does that mean I need to install the whole build chain ? Anyway to do that in a Docker container, maybe a ci/cd pipeline where I can just push my code and get an VST as a build artifact.