[PD-dev] library proposal

[Claude Heiland-Allen]

IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>>
>> The current setup means that you can override a pd-vanilla 
>> abstraction  using a binary class in ".", but you can't override a 
>> pd_vanilla  binary using an abstraction in "."  That seems to treat 
>> .pd  objectclasses as second class classes and I don't like that ;)
> 
> well, additional loaders are somewhere inbetween.
> e.g. .pdlua in path1 will override .pd in path0 but will be overridden 
> by .pd_linux in path2.
> which makes .pd a 3rd class citizen and .pdlua a 2nd class citizen.
> 
> personally i think this is something i can live with.
> what bothers me more is that .pd classes cannot "bypass" the 
> loader-mechanism (by registering the class).

Maybe compare with the abstraction cache patch I wrote a while ago, that 
has a similar observable result as a side-effect.

http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2008-10/012334.html


Claude
-- 
http://claudiusmaximus.goto10.org