[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.
>> 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
this has been in august 2002 !! note the resignation on the length of
pd itself can easily be kept simple and orthogonal without nameclashes.
i don't believe that externals/libraries can.
> But I give up
i have checked it in
More information about the Pd-list