[PD-dev] moving iemgui from core to extra

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Dec 15, 2006, at 7:52 AM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:

> Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>>> As the author of the only modified version of IEMGUI in five  
>>> years, I say no, we don't need this to happen.
>> It wasn't a question of need.  We are all fed ;).  Do you have any  
>> actual objections?
>
> well, i would not do it.
> i am a string advocate of splitting the pd-core from its objects  
> (as far as this is possible: i don't think of getting rid of [pd],  
> [inlet], [switch~] and friends).
> but there is no real use in getting IEMGUI's separated when the  
> numberbox, the signal-objects and the math are still part of core pd.
>
> however, if you feel the urge to do so and you feel like patching  
> pd-vanilla for each release, go on.
> you could also do a fork ;-)
>
> (it all boils down to: do you have any real benefits from this? or  
> are you just bored and need some work to do oer the holidays ;-) ?)

If we are going to have full-fledged namespaces, than this is an  
essential step.  Think C without any #includes or Java without any  
#imports.  Only the bare minimum is in the language itself.   
Everything else is a library.

The embedded iemgui objects are just an easy place to start, they are  
already one-class per file.  This would provide a test case for the  
idea, and then we can figure out how to separate the rest.

As for patching the core, each Pd-extended release has 20+ patches  
applied.  This current one has 22-24, depending on platform (you can  
see the list in packages/patches). Adding patches is trivial with the  
patch management in packages/Makefile.

.hc


------------------------------------------------------------------------

"[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are  
deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from  
scarcity."        -John Gilmore