[PD] a [wrap~] for control computation ?
IOhannes m zmoelnig
zmoelnig at iem.at
Wed Nov 10 19:38:36 CET 2004
guenter geiger wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Marc Boon wrote:
>
>>These two points clearly illustrate the need for namespaces in Pd.
>
> I don't agree. I think the solution would be to have only one wrap.
i think that there is no possibility to acchieve this, as we can easily
see if we have a look at the archives. this problem has been discussed
for several years now.
quoting Krzysztof:
>> So, I really do not know, if this is going to be a real step
>> forward, or just a fuel keeping this thread alive for some more
>> time?
this has been in august 2002 !! note the resignation on the length of
the thread.
pd itself can easily be kept simple and orthogonal without nameclashes.
i don't believe that externals/libraries can.
>
> But I give up
>
me too.
i have checked it in
mfg.as.dr
IOhannes
More information about the Pd-list
mailing list