[PD] limit in print

[zmoelnig at iem.at]

Quoting Piotr Majdak <piotr at majdak.com>:
> 
> 
> "there is definitely i limit in [print];
> there might be a limit in the symbol-length but i never found one (the
> 
> longest
> symbol i ever made was some 20.000 chars long)"
> 
> The bug/feature I found concerns symbol lists, where the second symbol
> 
> is cut if it exceeds appr. 100 characters. Thus, I didn't see any link
> 
> to your comment about a limit of 20.000 chars and my bug report.

actually we are talking about the same thing. the 20.000 characters which i
tested have only been to illustrate that the symbol itself is not corrupted,
just the [print].
and it has no answer to why the 1st "symbol" is not affected.

> 
> OK. I think, this behaviour should be mentioned in print-help.pd. What
> 
> is the right branch to check-in this kind of changes? (I've never 
> contributed to pd CVS)
> 

yes i agree that it should go into the documentation.
however the policy is, that only miller has to rights to write to the main-trunk
of pd in the CVS.
so the best thing (i think) would be to submit a patch to the patch-tracker at
the sourceforge site (assign it to miller if possible)
miller goes them through now and then and accepts them or not.


> PS: @Hannes: sorry being unsubscribed to gem-dev and pd-dev lists. I'm

> 
> http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2005-09/030947.html

so it has been on the pd-list which i think you are subscribed to.

> 
> sure you contribute to any many other discussions which I neither read

of course it was stupid on my side to bring in other (totally unrelated)
discussions. if i tell my girlfriend about the peculiarities of [print] is
should not expect you (or anyone else) to know.

i am sorry for that.

> nor understand. I'm just a pd user and I know it - there's no need to 
> remind me about that...

i don't see how i would have "degraded" you to an ordinary pd-user (i consider
myself one of this people)


mfg.asdr.er
IOhannes