[GEM-dev] how close are we...

[chris clepper]

>oops, and my nice template was for nothing then :(
>The new help patches have a "help-" prefix. so we'd have to rename them
>to help-whatever.pd
>
>
>You took a look at the template, by chance ?
>I think people are accostumed to change close the help patches after
>looking at them.

i had a look and i like it.  the only question is have multiple 
gemwins trying to go at once.  apart from the potential confusion, is 
it stable?  maybe we should stress test about a dozen of these going 
at once to find out.

>
>I think that some of the help patches can take the role of the simple
>examples in the future. Would be nice if the examples would be more
>in a tutorial style, like the the once that are included with pd.

i agree with the help file as an example file, but not with the 
tutorial approach.  one of the big problems i have with the pd 
tutorials (and pd in general) is how cluttered the patches get.  some 
of those example/tutorial patches are total cluster-fuck style that 
are difficult to read and nearly impossible to follow (the fft ones 
in particular).  that's why my approach was to separate the patch 
from the text in such a way that it aids usability of the patch and 
still makes the doc's text clear.  hopefully the correlation between 
what the text is referring to in the patch is helped by the inclusion 
of the images of the patch contents.  i haven't gotten very much 
in-depth feedback on the approach.

another thing about my tutorial style was designing it so that the 
text could elucidate various theoretical and conceptual issues, which 
would be unwieldy to do in the patch itself.  i also feel that the 
modular approach to the patches makes them easier to comprehend, more 
useful to pick apart, and demonstrates one of the inherent strengths 
of pd.

cgc

>Guenter
>