[PD-dev] is "pd64" the official name for double-pd?

[Miller Puckette]

I think pd64 is fine - however, it would be wise when distributing it to 
emphasize that it's 64 bit samples, not 64 bit architecture.

I'm pretty sure people will get confused by that.

cheers

Miller

On 7/25/23 08:32, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> so now that Pd-0.54 is out, I wonder whether we have settled on "pd64" 
> being the "official" name for double-precision binaries.
>
> the question mostly arises from an flext issue [54] that i recently 
> raised: flext can be built as a dynamic library, which is called 
> libflext-pd.so (for Pd obviously). since flext can only handle a 
> single floatsize, we would need a different dylib name for the 
> double-precision variant of Pd, and i suggested libflext-pd64.so
> as thomas has rightfully pointed out, this would only make sense if 
> "pd64" is indeed the agreed-on name of the double-precision Pd binary.
>
> so: is it?
>
> afaict there has been rough consensus about this from all vocal 
> parties; however miller has not said anything beyond the initial 
> "Pdouble".
>
> mgfasdr
> IOhannes
>
> PS: this is really about the names of the executable files 
> (/usr/bin/pd64, .../pd/bin/pd64.exe, .../pd/bin/pd64.dll).
> i think this *can* be kept distinct from the "marketing name" (e.g. 
> what is announced on websites), but of course it need not be.
>
> PPS: and yes, as indicated in previous mails, Debian now ships a 
> puredata64 package which includes a /usr/bin/pd64 binary; which is all 
> my doing (so you know who is to blame). while this sets a precedent, I 
> don't think it is too late to change the name (even though I would 
> rather not :-))
>
>
> [54] https://github.com/grrrr/flext/issues/54
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at lists.iem.at
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev