[PD] sending OSC bundles. + help files?
Steffen Leve Poulsen
slagmark at worldonline.dk
Fri Sep 12 20:23:42 CEST 2008
Phil Stone skrev:
> Phil Stone wrote:
>> Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>>> The idea is to embed the library settings into the patch. In
>>> Pd-0.40.3-extended, if you added this to the patch, it would work for
>>> any Pd-0.40.3-extended install:
>>> [import mrpeach]
>>> Or could use Miller's declare, but I don't remember what the state of
>>> the declare bugs were in 0.41.4. It would be something like:
>>> [declare -lib mrpeach]
>>> or maybe
>>> [declare -stdpath extra/mrpeach]
Just drop a patch, I'll be glad to test it.
>> Just to be clear, does this mean if I use [import] in a patch, it
>> becomes incompatible with vanilla Pd? Or can [import] be um, imported
>> into vanilla Pd?
> I apologize for following-up my own post, but this is a fairly important
> point, and I think it needs clarification. I'm about to release an
> abstraction, and I used [import] to eliminate a few dozen [mrpeach/...]
> style invocations of Martin Peach's OSC objects. Up until now, my
> abstraction would work with vanilla Pd if a couple of externals/libs
> were included (mrpeach being one of them). Have I now completely
> blocked out any vanilla Pd users by using [import]?
> Of course, I could use [declare], but I've seen some questions about
> [declare] bugs on this list.
> Is my only choice to go back to the redundant (and rather ugly)
> [mrpeach/routeOSC] style, in order to be compatible with vanilla Pd?
> Is it rude to ask why we are essentially forking a very useful object?
> Is there any possibility of this being resolved into one, compatible object?
> Phil Stone
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
More information about the Pd-list