[PD] Cyclone in vanilla?

Andy Farnell padawan12 at obiwannabe.co.uk
Tue Apr 22 01:52:10 CEST 2008

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:17:09 +0200
Derek Holzer <derek at umatic.nl> wrote:

> no worries, just thinking practically rather than wishfully ;-)

:) always appreciate a practical attitude

Practically, it's looking more and more like I need to drop
the wishful thinking that I can write a useful and easy to understand
textbook based around vanilla Pd. 

Using [expr~ pow($v1,$v2)] instead of [pow~] is exactly the sort of
ugly and confusing thing that sabotages learning, don't you agree?

Why we don't make the vanilla object set operationally complete
is beyond me. There are less than 10 essential missing objects 
and less than 20 desirable ones.

Why build a bridge 90% across the river and expect people to jump the
last few meters?

Use the source

More information about the Pd-list mailing list