[PD] [FM Discuss] Portuguese translation of the PD manual

Mathieu Bouchard matju at artengine.ca
Sat Aug 14 18:10:25 CEST 2010

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010, Bernardo Barros wrote:

> There is this dot (graphviz) language, do you know?

Since many years ago, but I don't see how it is any relevant. Thinking at 
all of pd's documentation conventions I've seen along the years, the 
tendency is away from having comments scattered around the patch, and 
towards getting it organised in a very rigid way using a rectangle pattern 
more reminescent of reference manuals of various programming languages.

So, why do you mention graphviz ?

> Yeah, but this will add computations to PD to proceed just to show up
> a patch, maybe bad idea.

Have you seen GridFlow's help patches ? The doc elements can move around 
on their own under certain conditions. It takes a lot of CPU. Generally 
speaking, people don't complain so much about the CPU it takes. And it's 
possible to do the same or better, with a lot less CPU. My point is that 
redoing the layout when reloading each patch, isn't really a CPU-expensive 
thing to do (if done better than how I do it now).

> Maybe a little change here? [inlet 1] [inlet 2] [inlet 3] ?

I think I proposed that in 2002 or 2003, and the reaction was negative. In 
the following years, there were two other different proposals to add 
arguments to inlets and outlets, both of which were for different purposes 
than ordering, and one of them was accepted in pd : [inlet~] and [outlet~] 
now take several numeric arguments. So, it's now impossible to add a 
numeric argument like that in pd, because of [inlet~] and [outlet~].

  _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801

More information about the Pd-list mailing list