[PD-dev] [declare -distro vanilla]

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> 
> On Mar 18, 2009, at 8:06 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> 
>> Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>>> Then there could be also something like a 'maxmsp' distro for a 
>>> compatibility mode.  So I was thinking there could be a "#X declare 
>>> -distro vanilla" that each distro saves into every file.  It would be 
>>> safely ignored for Pd versions that didn't support the -distro flag.
>>
>> what would e.g. Pd-vanilla that supported a "-distro" flag do if it 
>> encountered a [declare -distro maxmsp]?
> 
> That would be up to Miller.  Ignoring it would be one possibility.

ok.
so what would Pd-extended do if it encountered a
[declare -distro puredata]
since this is up to you, what would you actually do? ignore it as well?

and if so, what would be the purpose of this little exercise?

> 
>> furthermore: i don't think that it is good design to have [declare] 
>> accept _any_ arguments and ignore them at will (e.g. if it decides to 
>> not support "-distro", then it could either explicitely ignore 
>> "-distro" or accept any argument and only use those that it knows about.
> 
> I am not sure I follow what you are asking. The behavior of this would 
> be dependent on the distro.  So someone could quietly ignore all -distro 
> flags, they could through warnings or errors, or do a little dance.

i was not asking for something.

but i thought the idea of this would be to make projects more portable, 
rather than generate error messages.

>>> This distro flag would then setup the canvas-local namespace with the 
>>> libraries as they are loaded for that distro.
>>
>>
>> in general, i think the idea tobe able to load named library-bundles 
>> is not such a bad idea.

this should have read: "in general, i think the idea tobe able to load 
named library-bundles is not a good idea."

though now i am not so sure about this anymore. if the only purpose of 
my suggestion was to have a named shorthand for loading libraries in a 
specific way, then it is rather useless.
it should be possible to do this with [declare] as it is now.
the benefit for having a single shortcut for a collection of libs seems 
to be rather small.

> 
> I think that there should be some distro file format that could be 
> placed in a folder to be installed and used.  That way people could 
> freely create and distribution their own.

what exactly do you mean with "distro"?
is it the collection of objects it comes with?
does it include modifications to the Pd-core as well?


> I am thinking this isn't like a library, I think there would only be a 
> handful of distros defined. 

hmm, do i understand it correctly that by "a handful distros defined" 
you mean a fixed enumeration?
i'm rather glad that Pd has an open plugin-concept, and miller did not 
decide a one time that [expr], [fiddle~] and [bonk~] were enough.
(but then there would be no problems with nameclashes and distros and such)

just kidding of course.

but anyhow, how does it relate to "people could freely create"?


> I don't think this functionality would work 
> so well with many, many distros but perhaps.

if it does not work so well, then it's probably badly designed.
so let's improve it's desgin.

and imagine: nameclashing distros!



fgamdsr
IOhannes
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: linux_mode.pd
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20090319/e4084d42/attachment.asc>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: linux_mode-help.pd
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20090319/e4084d42/attachment.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3636 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20090319/e4084d42/attachment.bin>