[PD] 'pure' pd DSP abstractions wanted!

Enrique Erne enrique at netpd.org
Tue Aug 26 08:52:24 CEST 2008

zmoelnig at iem.at wrote:
> Quoting Jamie Bullock <jamie at postlude.co.uk>:
>> On Sun, 2008-08-24 at 09:54 -0400, Enrique Erne wrote:
>>> Hi Jamie
>>> It's not much but might be helpful to port other stuff to purepd.
>>> you'll find
>>> gt~.pd (>~)
>>> lt~.pd (<~)
>>> sgn~.pd
>>> http://www.netpd.org/eni/purepd/
>> That's great actually, and I'd love to contribute back into this.
>> However, if I'm not mistaked aren't there two purepd projects
>> netpd/purepd and Hans's purepd in pd svn? Would it be worth feeding your
>> patches into Hans's, and then any other abstractions I make/find I can
>> also feed into svn?
> just out of curiosity: >~.pd, <~.pd, sgn~ and what else in zexy are  
> already pd-vanilla abstractions (some of them are both abstractions  
> and externals for performance reasons); is there an advantage in  
> collecting these things in yet another arbitrary (as opposed to  
> grouped by functionality) library?

where are any abstractions/externals "grouped by functionality"?
do you mean pdmtl?

just to be clear: the files netpd.org/eni/purepd/ are not collected as 
library, they are just there since i have no other place to put them and 
it could be useful for purepd reasons.

the svn purepd patches contain some abstractions that confuse me a bit. 
actually i would like to contribute to purepd. (i.e. why is there moses 
and clip?)

maybe we should define a purepd styleguide too. the any_argument 
abstraction bothers me. i belive the patches could work without them and 
i would prefer to keep it super simple.

More information about the Pd-list mailing list