[GEM-dev] pix_filmDarwin...

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

hi.

i try to move the threads from pd-list to here, as it is more
appropriate (and my thread-view makes it almost impossible to see the
subject lines due to the depth ;-))


i see that chris has submitted a hack to disable the
pix_filmNEW/pix_movieNEW stuff.

i am fine with that for now, since pd-extended wants to be released
soon, but on the long run i would rather have this reverted and have a
look at why it failed to use pix_filmDarwin in the first place.

while disabling the entire code is a quick fix, i guess it will not
really help us on the long run to unify these objects.

what i am also talking about for ages is to rename pix_film.cpp to
pix_filmOS.cpp and pix_filmNEW.cpp to pix_film.cpp
this should make the renaming-schemes less complicated (only 2 classes
that will try to reserve the name [pix_film] instead of 3).
probably we could also not use pix_film.cpp as a new name for
pix_filmNEW.cpp (but i lack of good ideas; "NEW" should at least vanish
and make place for something that tells us more about the functionality
than the date...)

of course this also applies to pix_movie.

any objections to this?



and i would very much like to ask to speed gurus among us, whether it
would be possible to use the pix_film(NEW) with optimized paths, in
order to make pix_filmDarwin,... really superfluous and deprecate it on
the long run.

fmga.sdr
IOhannes