[PD-dev] future of [declare]

[Roman Haefeli]

On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 12:22 -0800, Miller Puckette wrote:
> Followup:  it looks like currently, "declaring" a path inside an
> abstraction adds the declaration, buggily, to the whole line of parent
> patches.  one result of this is that, if you have a bunch of copies of
> an abstraction "declaring" a path, it actually gets searched over and
> over again every time a file is opened.  So I really need to fix this...
> meantime, if you're putting "declares" in an abstraction, you might
> be making load times grow very high.

stupid me.. after having posted exactly that to the tracker, i just
discovered, that you already discovered the problem ;-) sorry for the
noise (i misunderstood your lines, when i read them the last time).

  
> I still suggest never putting declares insige abstractions, since nobody has
> yet proposed a situation in which it's a good idea, and now it appears to
> be very bad for performance.

i think, we should come up with use cases here. in my idea of [declare],
i would like to use it to let a patch OR an abstractions loads its
dependencies. if i create pd-file that is intended to be used as an
abstraction and it uses [abs~] from zexy, then i would like to have it
load zexy on its own by using a [declare -stdlib zexy]. as a result, the
user of this abstraction doesn't have to think about the dependencies of
the abstractions he/she is using. i guess, that would be a reason to
have [declare]'s evaluated also inside abstractions.

what are the use cases speaking against the use of [declare]s inside
abstractions? the fact, that it makes the loading of patches slow is not
a conceptual reason, but obviously a sad fact.

roman    


		
___________________________________________________________ 
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de