[PD-dev] individual files vs. libs for externals

Mathieu Bouchard matju at sympatico.ca
Tue Jun 10 23:11:52 CEST 2003

On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, guenter geiger wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> > tiresome when creating a family of very related externals
> > makes it more difficult to share code between related externals
> > may take more RAM
> > may take more filehandles
> I understand that your point of view is gridflow centric, which is a
> completely different thing, because it introduces a new system on top
> of pd. Thats not what I would call pd externals in the standard sense.
> For the externals I am talking about the arguments don't hold.

Okay, my point of view is extremely gridflow centric, but the things I
have listed also would hold for GEM, PDP, and so on, so generally
it is also library-of-externals centric... those libraries introduce new
subsystems on top of PD as well.

Therefore, arguments against small independent externals, when they come
from a background in big systems of interrelated externals, are
irrelevant, as your actual question was whether small independent
externals are a good way of doing things from the perspective of small
independent externals.

I would expect the paradigm of small independent externals to remain
unchallenged, as long as all inappropriate answers are properly

Have a nice day.

Mathieu Bouchard                       http://artengine.ca/matju

More information about the Pd-dev mailing list