protecting objects

pix at pix at
Thu Jan 4 22:46:55 CET 2001

This reminds me... 

I was always wondering if it would be possible to have
an interface-less pd. Since there is the loadbang object, it is quite
plausible to have a patch that does everything it needs to do without any
user interaction at all (or perhaps only interacts via midi or some other
non-gui method).

There would need to be an "exit" object tho, so that pd could close itself
when it was finished.

A little crzy, but it would permit the creation of 'command line' tools in
pd. Possibly commandline arguments could be fed into the $1, $2.. etc
positional parameters.


On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Olaf Matthes wrote:

> > by the way : would it make sense to create a "pd-play", that lacks of
> > the editing-possibility ? i just think that it might be more secure in
> > several cases (to keep users from incidently damaging patches).
> >
> > mfg.gtr.ztr
> > IOhannes
> A very good idea! Sometimes I would need to have pd-playback capabilities on
> machines without pd installed. I still write stand-alone C++ programms that
> could be created much more easily using pd just because of the easier use of
> a stand-alone-programms.
> A small (filesize) pd-player would be a dream for publishing pd-patches in
> the internet for non-pd users!
> Olaf

More information about the Pd-list mailing list