[PD] pd extended development

Roman Haefeli reduzierer at yahoo.de
Thu Apr 17 12:18:20 CEST 2008

On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 08:26 +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> Hallo,
> Roman Haefeli hat gesagt: // Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > how important is the portability between pd-extended and
> > pd-vanilla/externals considered? any solution, that involves the
> > [mylib/myclass] scheme creates patches, that are broken on a pd
> > installation with multiclass externals. 
> This problem is not related to multiclass externals (i.e. bundles) at
> all: All patches that use a directory prefix to specify object names
> break as soon as that directory name isn't available because it doesn't
> exist. 

hm...does that mean, when there is:


[zexy/abs~] could be instantiated? i tried and it didn't work. i must be
misunderstanding you. for bundles, even if there is a directory prefix,
[mylib/myabs] doesn't work.

> As pd-vanilla doesn't have most of the subdirectories in extra, that
> pd-extended does, and as there is no common installer just for externals
> yet, people who install their own externals may have them in whatever
> directory. It all depends on their paths settings. 

i don't see an advantage in the user being responsible where to put
dependencies. why cannot we come up with a standard? how will it be
possible to create portable patches independently from some user-edited
configuration file?
as others already pointed out, other programming languages use standards
and a script/programm will run on every system, that has the
dependencies installed. there is no need for the user to tweak the
configuration or adapt the script. don't we want to get at this point as


Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de

More information about the Pd-list mailing list