[GEM-dev] weirdeness

[cyrille henry]

Le 14/02/2011 12:36, IOhannes m zmoelnig a écrit :
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2011-02-14 12:06, cyrille henry wrote:
>>
>>
>> is it normal that every pix_blablabla object get instancied as a
>> pix_freeframe object?
>
> yes this is normal.
> FreeFrame (and frei0r) also register loaders, so you can instantiate
> these effects as [pix_<pluginname>].
>
>> (with a "error: GemException: couldn't find 'blablabla'.''")
>
> could be that i increased verbosity with one of the last commits, so you
> actually notice that freeframe is involved (as opposed to the object
> simply failing to create)
>
> just to make sure: freeframe/frei0r loaders should only take effect if
> there is actually such a plugin.
> e.g. if you create [pix_blabla] and there is no FreeFrame plugin named
> "blabla" but there is an abstraction pix_blabla.pd in your path, you
> should still end up with the abstraction.
if there is no freeframe plugin, and no abstraction, then what is the pix_blabla object?
something that don't do anything?
except breaking connection of your patch, since this object have only 1 inlet.
so, i think it would be more logic that pix_blabla does not instantiate.
but that's not really important.

c

>
> fg
> asdrm
> IOhannes
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAk1ZE8QACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvRjAQCgnI6g9PAF1BO8bOyImNY0zAgD
> v7gAoMlGvxC6mL6WXYhQGrW1lxvxuRTq
> =etwb
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GEM-dev mailing list
> GEM-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev