[PD-dev] why using vanilla better than extended; was :Re: pow~ in Cyclone [was: Re: stripping down Pd-extended's default libs]
jmmmpais at googlemail.com
Mon Feb 23 21:53:10 CET 2009
that's true, after making the question I thought that mainly the most
hardcore guys stick to pd-van, because it's easier for them to adapt it to
their needs, and there's more tradition with self-programming (enhancing
the core package). but I would dare say that for many
non-developper-users, pd-ext is much more used than pd-van. pd-ext is a
couple of decimals behind pd-van (and the windows version even more, as
the disk for it is out of order since last summer), but HC doesn't have a
grant to work on pd-ext.
> yep, when you need to compile some stuff, pd-extended is not really made
> for you.
> since i quite often have to use a very recent Gem version for my
> project, (specially when i correct some Gem bugs when working on this
> project), i must recompile Gem on the target machine, so using extended
> is not really easy.
> using extended is ok when installing a project i made about 1 year ago...
More information about the Pd-dev