[PD-dev] strings

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, padawan12 wrote:

> I tie myself in knots trying string-like operations sometimes :), so I 
> know its a can of worms, but what are the fundamental limitations 
> surrounding symbol.

The fundamental limitation is that there are enough pd developers who 
believe that "pd is not meant for string processing", that you can be sure 
that it can't happen in the MAIN branch. There's also the belief that "all 
pd-like systems that had elaborate typesystems, have failed" which I 
haven't heard from many people, but one is enough, if that one is the 
leader.

> Did I hear a rumour that better string handling is chalked in for Pd 
> soon?

Huh??

> What would be the best way to introduce the concept of strings to Pd in 
> a consistent and robust way.

what I could find in archives is the bottom of 
http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2005-12/005460.html but that 
is just an allusion to the actual plan. I can also see one year earlier 
http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2004-11/024330.html but I 
suspect that I wrote more mails about the topic between those two. You may 
also look at more mails in that "non-leaky symbols" thread.

I have all the plan in my head, it's just that I don't want to re-explain 
it. The next and last thorough explanation that I'll make, I'll make it to 
GCC, it'll understand and there will be no need to arguë. Where the shit 
will hit the fan is when I'll have to introduce a "next-generation Pd API" 
and a migration plan, because too many externals just assume that if 
something isn't a float, then it must be a symbol, and then t_atom is 
rarely handled properly enough for anything related to reference-counting 
(missing constructors and destructors).

  _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju
| Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada