[PD] libpd separating gui from core
jancsika at yahoo.com
Mon Jan 13 20:25:43 CET 2014
On 01/13/2014 09:32 AM, Dan Wilcox wrote:
> As Hans has proposed for years, IMO this is really the only way to
> perhaps solve the "PD gui development doesn't move fast enough"
> problem in the long term. In this case, Miller would have the core (in
> libpd) & the pd-vanilla wrapper gui formally separated while everyone
> else can then use the same libpd core within other flavors. The DSP
> core is the heart and soul and I see no reason to try and change that
> in any way.
Sorry, I don't know quite what you're referring to here. The only two
examples I gave-- $@ and [initbang] wouldn't change anything in the DSP
> On Jan 13, 2014, at 1:54 AM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com
> <mailto:jancsika at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>> #2 is hard. Where would you start and how would you proceed?
> I think what makes sense is to list out the main interfaces to the DSP
> core that are currently being used by TCL.
I think by DSP core you're referring to:
* DSP graph stuff
* message dispatching system
* various widgetbehaviors and data structures parentwidgetbehaviors
* all the gui logic in g_editor.c
* gui queuing stuff, array selection/manipulation logic, mouse motion
callbacks, and probably other things I'm forgetting
Is this correct?
> In the simplest case, we could literally create wrapper functions
> which emulate the tcl argument lists. libpd currently wraps the formal
> message sending, midi, & processing areas. I think now we need to see
> if it's possible to wrap the DSP graph editing/manipulation, canvas,
> patch loading/saving, etc.
I'm not clear on what libpd actually includes. For example, does all
the logic from g_editor remain intact?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list