[PD] a [wrap~] for control computation ?
marcboon at dds.nl
Wed Nov 10 15:35:39 CET 2004
Johannes M Zmoelnig wrote:
> 2) this keeps me from having nameclashes on my machine: for instance i
> am using Gem a lot (no-na) but i don't want it in my .pdrc for testing
> purposes; using Gem+maxlib would result in the famous [scale]-problem
> which i am not very interested in (i mean: i am interested in the
> problem but not in having it)
> 3) thus i didn't know that the others existed. (even though it might
> seem strange that i did not realize that there was one in the iemlib)
These two points clearly illustrate the need for namespaces in Pd.
Like every other OO programming language, Pd would greatly benefit from
namespaces, like <package>.<object>.
Then, for example, zexy.wrap would be a different object than iem.wrap, and
there would not be any name clashes.
More information about the Pd-list