[PD] [declare]: -path seems not to be added to the searchpathes

Roman Haefeli reduzierer at yahoo.de
Mon May 28 22:09:47 CEST 2007

On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 19:55 +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> Hallo,
> Roman Haefeli hat gesagt: // Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 16:58 +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> > > Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > > > hi
> > > > 
> > > > i cannot get [declare]'s -path-flag working. i tried relative pathes as
> > > > well as absolute ones. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > oh yes, i forgot: that's a problem with [declare]; it only gets executed
> > > when the patch is loaded....
> > 
> > ah, ok. thanks. however, it works only for the patch, that is containing
> > the [declare]-object, whereas at the same time a [declare
> > -lib /path/to/somelib] makes the objects from the external somelib
> > available for all patches running in the same instance of pd. isn't that
> > kind of inconsistent?
> This clearly is a bug in [declare]. I now filed a bug report regarding
> this behaviour with ID 1714473. Attached is the example I used to
> illustrate the bug.

sorry, i didn't check your declare-test-setup. otherwise, i'd have
noticed, that we are not speaking about the same thing. what you found,
is a far more complex issue than what i was speaking about. 

what i meant to be inconsistent:

- [declare -lib somelib] makes the objects of the external 'somelib'
availabe to ALL patches, not only to the [declare]'s parent patch.

- [declare -path somefolder] makes the abstractions from 'somefolder'
available ONLY to the parent patch, i.e. the patch, that contains the

i don't see why abstractions from a certain location should be handled
differently than objects from a certain library? shouldn't they be
treated the same (at least from the user's point of view)?


Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de

More information about the Pd-list mailing list