martinrp at vax2.concordia.ca
Fri Nov 5 17:51:48 CET 2004
I have a hard time myself with the library thing...I usually use only
one or two objects from a library. Would it not be preferable to have
the individual objects from a library inside their own folder nested
inside the externs folder?
I would also feel a lot better if there was a mechanism to register
every object with a unique name, so that a developer who wanted to
publish their object would register it in the database the same way you
choose an email address: if the name is already in use, try again with
another name. The names database could reside within the cvs repository.
So you would have counter, counter1, counter2, ...
Tim Blechmann wrote:
> hi all ...
> i'm currently thinking of a way to solve the nameclash problem (counter,
> scale, prepend, gate...)
> here are some suggestions for a solution ... with some pros and cons:
> - namespaces: add the library name like library/object or
> pros: - selectable at runtime
> - the patch will work exactly as you expect, since you see that object
> is from library
> cons: - "/" is already used for the search path (shouldn't be a big
> problem), "::" are two chars
> - only works if an object is compiled as library ... if a
> library is split to single externals (like the build system does) pd
> is not aware of the library name
> - startup flav: having another flag like -force library/object or -force
> pros: - easy to use
> cons: - you can't use both library1::object and library2::object
> - behaviour of the patch depends on startup flags (less portable)
> - communication: figure out, if the external name is already in use
> pros: - no implementation effords
> cons: - not really working (that's why we've got these problems *g*)
> - standard behaviour: if object1 is doing the same as object2, except
> that it is missing one feature, add this feature to object1, if they
> behave exactly the same, the nameclash isn't a problem any more ...
> (escept for the waste of memory)
> pros: - as above
> cons: - as above
> personally i'd prefer the communication in combination with a startup
> flag ... but i'm curious about other ideas or comments ...
> cheers ... tim
More information about the Pd-list