[PD] scratching my head about zexy
chris at mccormick.cx
Thu Nov 6 11:07:39 CET 2008
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 11:39:51AM -0800, Miller Puckette wrote:
> Well, what I want to be able to do is put max-compatible objects into Pd
> vanilla (such as gate and scale) without breaking libraries. However, I
> didn't realize there were libraries out there that named things the same as
> Pd built-ins, with the intention of not ever getting instantiated under
> the original name.
> Maybe, if zexy/pack and zexy/unpack are only meant to be called using
> their "path" names, it would be better to specify them as "zexy/pack"
> etc. in class_new()?
> If it isn't possible to alias objects with external libraries, I don't see
> how I can ever add a class to Pd once some library appears that uses the
> same name.
> Ideas, anyone?
This problem has been 100% solved already:
The described way of doing things is a win-win for developers and for
users; both get maximum flexibility. I can't think of any good reason
why we are still debating this and [declare] and [import] on this list.
[from max import gate]
[from max import scale]
[from zexy import *]
[pack] <- inbuilt is overridden
[zexy/pack] <- inbuilt isn't overridden
I hope this doesn't come across too blunt or unconstructive; I just want
to see this issue get solved and disappear.
More information about the Pd-list