More questions on Vixen tech.

[A Marchini]

I haven't been playing with it too much, but I was curious if the Vixen program was capable of multiple instances.
Also, are there command line options by any chance.

My thinking here is scripting and the Event input plugins, and can they initiate another vixen sequence independant of the main coordinating program (ok like a subroutine).
So some event occurs, triggers vixen which launchs... vixen, which runs some asynchronous sequence, and then perhaps exits.

Or is this already in there and I am just more out of touch than I want to be right now on the software.
I suppose if the scripting system has its own thread, then it is a non issue.

Another useful feature that would be handy at this point would be some kind of vixen driver that allows multiple instances of vixen to share a resource, like a serial port or the parallel port.

Anyways, K.C. if you get a chance to comment, please do.

Tony

[KC]

Please tell me if I'm off the mark of your intentions here.

With the current trigger mechanism, the trigger response is an sequence that is executed in its entirety without blocking. Is this the result you are intending?

Technically, 1.1 allows for multiple plugins to share a port, but none of the plugins allow for it. The UI that warns you about multiple port assignments is purely UI and is there for the user's benefit only. In 2.0, a plugin can specify that it will allow for shared port use, releasing the port when its event call is completed. The only reason for that is so that the UI can reflect the intentions of the plugin authors.

Again, if I'm barking up the wrong tree, tell me.

[A Marchini]

Please tell me if I'm off the mark of your intentions here.

With the current trigger mechanism, the trigger response is an sequence that is executed in its entirety without blocking. Is this the result you are intending?



um, yup... thats what I was wonderin. So the trigger can execute a sequence separate and asynchronous from the main "show", then right. However the sequence of control must be on a separate plugin because you can not share a port yet, however calls into a plugin may be separate sources.



Again, if I'm barking up the wrong tree, tell me.

Woof, woof, you trapped the correct animal it seems.

Tony

[flowblok]

Ah - I just remembered something to ask you related to this, KC.

If the main show is running, and a trigger fires, can you get the trigger to pause the main show, run, and then unpause the main show after it's done?

And is this something which can be specified in the UI?

[darko]

Please tell me if I'm off the mark of your intentions here.

With the current trigger mechanism, the trigger response is an sequence that is executed in its entirety without blocking. Is this the result you are intending?

Technically, 1.1 allows for multiple plugins to share a port, but none of the plugins allow for it. The UI that warns you about multiple port assignments is purely UI and is there for the user's benefit only. In 2.0, a plugin can specify that it will allow for shared port use, releasing the port when its event call is completed. The only reason for that is so that the UI can reflect the intentions of the plugin authors.

Again, if I'm barking up the wrong tree, tell me.

KC, could you clarify what you mean by 'non blocking'?

If two sequences, each on their own trigger, control a shared channel, what happens?

Is it possible, after a trigger sequence is over, to return all channels to a baseline level? Is the solution to this just to have a normal program running in the background doing "Ambient" things, and have triggered sequences override specific channels?