[PD] select issues

Chris McCormick chris at mccormick.cx
Sun Dec 2 03:17:33 CET 2007

On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 02:06:52PM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> >Which has bitten me on the ass at least once when making music with
> >someone who uses pd-extended. Hans, I wonder if you could make it  
> >clear
> >to people who download pd-extended that it is incompatible with Pd, an
> >older version, and that it is bundled with many externals which aren't
> >in Pd by default?
> >
> >Note that I really appreciate all the work you are doing to make  
> >people's
> >lives easier, and don't want to put a dent in your efforts. I just  
> >think
> >if we're not careful with breaking compatability people are going  
> >to get
> >very confused very quickly.
> Correct me if I am wrong, but using Pd-extended vs Pd-vanilla of the  
> same version is no more incompatible than using Pd-vanilla 0.40 vs.  
> 0.39.  If you use [declare] in a patch in pd-vanilla 0.40, then it  
> won't work in pd-vanilla 0.39.  If you use [atan2] in Pd-vanilla 0.37  
> then it won't be compatible with pd-vanilla 0.38, and vice-versa.

If you change the behaviour of something as fundemental as [select]
in pd-extended and it doesn't get changed in Pd, then the patches and
libraries I write under Pd won't work properly in pd-extended.

You are correct though, if I recall correctly the specific problem I
had with someone using pd-extended was when I tried to show them
something that only works in 0.40. I had to get them to download the
latest in order to get my abstraction to work. Which is fine - I guess
you can't be expected to track the latest Pd exactly.

> Pd-extended 0.39 is basically like half way between pd-vanilla 0.39  
> and 0.40 since it includes patches that get included in 0.40, but  
> doesn't include miller's 0.40 changes.

Got it.

> This is the reason why I made the [hcs/version] object, you can issue  
> a warning if someone is using your patch with a version not tested or  
> known to be incompatible.  It's not in Pd-vanilla, I never submitted  
> it to the patch tracker since I wasn't sure of the best interface for  
> it, like maybe it should be a message like [;pd version(, then you  
> listen on [receive pd]-[route version] for the response.

Might be a good idea if it acheives widespread use.




More information about the Pd-list mailing list