[PD] libpd separating gui from core
danomatika at gmail.com
Mon Jan 13 23:14:56 CET 2014
On Jan 13, 2014, at 5:05 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 01/13/2014 03:11 PM, Dan Wilcox wrote:
>> Woops, forgot the reply-all.
>> On Jan 13, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Sorry, I don't know quite what you're referring to here. The only two examples I gave-- $@ and [initbang] wouldn't change anything in the DSP core.
>> I wasn't referring to anything in particular, only in general.
> Then what do you think of "$@" or [initbang]? Are there good reasons for them not being in the core? What about infinite undo? Or symbols that don't cause memory leaks?
Those would definitely be nice to have. I don't know what $@ refers to, is it the object arguments as a list?
>>>> On Jan 13, 2014, at 1:54 AM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Yes. Everything is still there. It merely abstracts sending messages and midi into and out of the libpd instance. I don't see why we couldn't do the same with what's needed by an external gui wrapper around it.
> Hm... I didn't realize that. That being the case, you could certainly go ahead and figure out some interim way of sending and parsing tcl messages using whichever gui toolkit you prefer. However, it's worth understanding a bit about why Pd-l2ork has diverged somewhat from the code you'd be wrapping (in no particular order, and definitely not exhaustive):
That's all good info to know, thanks. I'd imagine libpd would't need to handle *move functions though. Does the dsp graph rely on positioning? I thought only via connections. I'd imagine the gui wrapper should only worry about positioning and simply update those changes when saving.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list