[PD-dev] call for discussion double-precision file extension

Roman Haefeli reduzent at gmail.com
Tue Mar 29 17:49:51 CEST 2022


On Tue, 2022-03-29 at 17:29 +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
> +1

+1

> I think it's nicer to use a common extension and have the 
> platform/arch/floatsize specifier as a seperate component.


> > I didn't especially like this back then, but in the meantime i've
> > come to the conclusion that it's probably the best way forward.

Why? I think it is much friendlier for the user to see in the filename
what is in it. If binaries are distinguished by installing them to
separated folders (but still share filename), people will try to move
files around to make things work and thus getting into a mess really
quickly. One shouldn't have to use 'file pdexternal.ext' to know what
actually is in it. 

Having said that, I'm still curious to know what you thought are the
cons back then.
Roman
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20220329/eb364127/attachment.sig>


More information about the Pd-dev mailing list