Well, maybe mpd would be worth considering. No idea though how much it allows to implement in client yet.It could be nice for casual listnening/organizing, especially when they'll add rg, musepack support etc, as they plan.
Not to mention that you'll be taking the UI and stripping away some of the best parts. You'll just have another Winamp2 clone with a FB2k UI, which will suck.
In my opinion, managed and/or interpreted languages suck for serious applications. If it doesn't compile to stand-alone machine code, it will be slower. I don't care if it is easier for you to program, or easier for others to learn and develop for.Of course, that's just my opinion. Feel free to carry out your plans.
There was a similar app for Linux called Musik. I can't get their site to load now. I don't get a 404 or anything, just nothing. Somebody linked the site to me once last year and I haven't checked up on it since so I don't know if the project's been scrapped or what. Here's the link I have in case it comes back up: http://musik.berlios.de/
You're entitled to your opinion, which is clearly wrong
The players you wish to borrow components from basically duplicate the style of Winamp2. Inputs do their own file reading, create their own decoding threads, and open the output themselves, and they can only decode one file at a time. I'm not sure about all of those players, but the XMMS components are probably coded to use GTK for their dialogs as well.
It can't really be called a Foobar2000 clone if you don't duplicate the core service system outlined by the SDK. With some work, you can duplicate the core, or even go so far as to wrap all of the platform-specific functionality that most components will need, so they won't too many source changes to be recompiled for either platform.
If you really knew anything about the underlying design, you'd know why it's so easy to wrap many of the Winamp2 clones' components into each other player, and why it's such a pain to wrap them into Foobar2000 itself.
Why yes, the Winamp2 input wrapper is quite buggy. What a surprise, the AMIP wrapper and Winamp2 general component combo is not without its share of annoying bugs.
MuMart: Do you think that all good features can be implemented like dithering and replaygain? What about foobar2000 licence? Does it allow borrowing/copying some algorithms?
I've recently moved to linux and have been thinking about having a FB2K like audio app for that platform.
Anyway, the success of foobar2000 is not about the software architecture, it's the fact that it does what lots of people want in one place.
How do think it can do so many useful things, if not because of its software architecture (which does not only cover input/DSP/output)?
None of the current linux players currently have the features of foobar - and I hope to start a project to create one.
The foobar architecture is indeed very flexible and successful. The point I was making is that it is not necessary to keep the *exact* foobar2000 architecture and port it over to make a software with the same functionality. The important thing is for the app to have all the features the users demand.