[PD] Fwd: absolute vs relative filepath on oggread~

[Òscar Martínez Carmona]

Yay, I've just reported a bug!


On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>wrote:

>
> In the Help menu, click on "Report a bug".  :-)
>
> .hc
>
> On 02/05/2013 11:08 AM, Òscar Martínez Carmona wrote:
> > Never done that before, excuse my idiocy and tell me how!
> > Thanx!
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On 02/05/2013 04:30 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 19:58 +0100, Òscar Martínez Carmona wrote:
> >>>> hey, still having problems with that, by now I'm doing it with the
> >>>> absolute filepath... maybe the solution it'll be making the main
> >>>> applicattion finding out the f*cking path and sending the whole thing
> >>>> to pd via OSC, or maybe trying it another day!
> >>>
> >>> If I am not mistaken, it hasn't been mentioned yet (though IOhannes
> >>> assumed it very early) in this thread that [oggread~ ] oddly reads
> >>> relative to Pd's start location (unlike many other classes like
> >>> [textfile] or [readsf~ ] which read relative to the patch's location).
> >>>
> >>> IMHO, this makes it very difficult for a patch writer to use relative
> >>> paths as the patch doesn't have any notion of where Pd was started
> from.
> >>> I consider the whole idea of reading relative to Pd's start location
> >>> flawed. A similar case is the 'open patch.pd path' message to [s pd].
> >>> Also this one reads relative to Pd's start location. However,
> >>> considering that it was implemented this way, because it probably
> >>> originates from the '-open' commandline flag, where it makes sense to
> >>> use a path relative to the current working directory for loading a
> >>> patch, this one is excused.
> >>>
> >>> For you, this means if your OSC application knows where Pd was started
> >>> from, you need to make it use a path relative to that location.
> >>> Otherwise you you're left with using absolute paths. When dealing with
> >>> objects like [oggread~], I'd go for absolute paths, it's just seems
> >>> safer and saner to deal with.
> >>>
> >>> (or someone fixes [oggread~ ], which I even wouldn't consider to break
> >>> backwards compatibility as the current implementation doesn't really
> >>> allow to use relativ paths in meaningful way)
> >>>
> >>> Roman
> >>
> >> I agree, relative should be relative to the patch. Please file a bug
> >> report on
> >> that.
> >>
> >> .hc
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>



-- 
Òscar Martínez Carmona
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20130206/3fd0aa7a/attachment-0001.htm>