[PD] name collisions, namespaces ..
czaja at chopin.edu.pl
Wed Aug 28 17:34:03 CEST 2002
why on earth do we need two separate implementations of the abs~
class? They seem equivalent. And, after all, the abs~ is to be
included in the Pd proper at some point...
Well, having namespaces in Pd would be a dream come true for some
users (including myself), but from the pov of many more users it
would have been much better, if the coders agreed to avoid name
duplication at all costs, either merging their efforts, or using
pre- or postfixes or whatever.
I think, even if there are namespaces, people mostly tend to
ignore them, unless they are forced to comply.
IOhannes zmoelnig wrote:
> as a by-product, it is very likely that the (discussed)
> namespacing-mechanism ([zexy::abs~] vs. [Gem::abs~]) would have to be
> implemented anyway.
More information about the Pd-list