[PD-dev] BUG: namespace prefixes broken in 0.40

carmen _ at whats-your.name
Thu Nov 2 08:08:04 CET 2006

On Thu Nov 02, 2006 at 02:02:52PM +0800, Chris McCormick wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 10:39:50PM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> > >On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> > >I advocate use of consistent syntax all over pd. Consistency is  
> > >more important than minimality. If pd's syntax is too minimal, it  
> > >encourages small syntax hacks that aren't portable to the rest of  
> > >the pd system, such as -y amp(0:100)(0:100).
> > 
> > That is strange, I hadn't seen that before.  I also have not seen  
> > gridflow before.  I should say, then I am talking about things in  
> > common usage.  There is definitely a lot of stuff shoe-horned into  
> > some of those draw and plot boxes.  I wonder how to make that stuff  
> > work without the new syntax?
> I would say that datastructures should be considered amongst things that
> are "in common usage". It's simply not possible to use datastructures
> for visualising audio data without the scaling syntax, and I think
> there's a good reason that Miller made the syntax look like that -
> it's not possible to do it without some kind of custom syntax like
> that.

so youre advocating arbitrary microformatting on a per-case basis instead of fixing the pd syntax so its not necessary?

hpoefully i just misread.. how do you generate/parse -y amp(0:100)(0:100) easily. maybe the nonexistent regexp external?

 Datastructures are part of the Pd core.
> Incidentally, I also think this highlights the need for a poll of the
> Pd list at some point so we can get some idea of what users are using
> what externals, abstraction sets, libraries, etc. I would love to see
> the numbers, and it would probably be useful for Miller to see what is
> popular about Pd in a quantifiable scientific way.

what about an opt-in usage statistics 'phone home'. initng does this for example.. firefox just does it without even asking..

> > I don't quite get the scaling stuff, so I guess its hard to see why  
> > it needs to be done that way.  Perhaps there could be a scaling  
> > standard variable like float x, float y, and float w.  It could be an  
> > array of 4 values, or two values, a ratio and offset.
> I think you should read up on DS some more and try using the scaling
> yourself.
> > Another difference between [declare] and data structures/gridflow is  
> > that obstensibly, [declare] will be used everywhere, while DS/GF  
> > would be a special topic.  For special areas, special syntax is  
> > perhaps more excusable than something used everywhere.
> In my opinion datastructures should stay core to Pd as more and more
> people create GOP datastructure abstractions for others to use. It's
> possible to make amazing custom GUIs that will work with vanilla Pd
> without requiring users to compile/install complicated externals.

is it? that would be great. but i think its currently a pipedream...


> Best,
> Chris, your friendly neighbourhood DS advocate. ;)
> -------------------
> chris at mccormick.cx
> http://mccormick.cx
> _______________________________________________
> PD-dev mailing list
> PD-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev

More information about the Pd-dev mailing list