[PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Liam Goodacre liamg_uw at hotmail.com
Sat Sep 22 19:01:46 CEST 2018


I support IOhannes' idea of distinguishing between opening from the menu and opening from the OS file system, and of asking the user if they want a new instance.

Another case for multiple patches is this: the user is editing a patch, but worries that he has misplaced a connection or damaged it somehow. So before saving it, he opens the earlier version from the menu, just to check that everything is in place. Then he closes the old version and saves the new one. I find myself doing this a lot, and it doesn't seem particularly "expert" to me.

Having said this, I think the new feature is worth keeping, so long as there is some provision for multiple instances of the same patch.
________________________________
From: Pd-list <pd-list-bounces at lists.iem.at> on behalf of Miller Puckette <msp at ucsd.edu>
Sent: 22 September 2018 17:27
To: IOhannes m zm??lnig
Cc: pd-list at lists.iem.at
Subject: Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Ah, yes, a fourth option: have a new "pd really-open" message to open
a file without checking if it's a duplicate.

cheers
M

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 06:18:42PM +0200, IOhannes m zm??lnig wrote:
> On 9/22/18 3:17 PM, katja wrote:
> > Much to my alarm, Pd 0.49test3 prevents loading multiple instances of
> > a patch, and release notes tell us that this is on purpose.
>
>
> funnily, i recently worked on a related regression where double-clicking
> on a Pd-patch (in your favourite Windows exploder) would start a new
> instance of Pd (rather than switching to the current instance and
> raising the patch if already opened).
>
> note however, that this regression (fix) is unrelated to what you are
> describing.
>
> and i agree that it should be possible to open the same patch multiple
> times. esp. on a programmatic layer (that is: by sending messages to Pd).
> i guess, when opening an already opened patch from the menu (Ctrl-O), Pd
> could *ask* whether this is really intended.
>
>
>
> gkmdsar
> IOhannes
>




> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list




_______________________________________________
Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20180922/f258be17/attachment.html>


More information about the Pd-list mailing list