[PD] question about import and some of the patches found in the manual

[Roman Haefeli]

On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 12:58 -0500, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 12:51 -0500, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
> > I tried opening a patch that used some of the rradical abstractions and
> > found that in the latest svn snapshot pd-l2ork is based on, import fails
> > to detect rradical (I thought that is what the meta file was supposed to
> > do which is found inside rradical folder). More so, declare also fails
> > to extend the path [declare -stdpath extra/rradical]. Either way ezdac~
> > (for instance) fails to be created and the only way one can create it is
> > by creating it as rradical/ezdac~. Is this really how things should work
> > in the latest release? If so, what is the purpose of import when
> > practically no lib is built in pd-extended as a lib but rather as a set
> > of objects?
> 
> To add to this, it appears that import fails to "import" directories
> having abstractions only (rather than libs). You can still "import"
> individual objects but I guess the latest release is leaning towards
> moving away from both declare and import in favor of prefixing
> everything, correct?

I don't know, but I am pretty sure that both [import] and [declare] are
still heavily in use. I don't know of any plans to get rid of those. 

Also, I'd find pd-l2ork quite unusable without [declare]. [declare] is
the vanilla way of loading paths and libs and is the smallest
denominator, that should work everywhere (i.e in all Pd flavours).

> Also, is declare deprecated? It has apparently no effect on the search
> path (at least not here)--even if I declare absolute path it still fails
> to find anything.
> 

It's working at least in Pd-extended (0.42.6) ,Pd (0.42.6) and Pd-0.43. 

Roman