[PD] consolidate backward- and MaxMSP compatibility in Cyclone (was: Purpose of Cyclone)

[katja]

Summarizing, the discussion in this thread has so far rendered three
practical and simple solutions to improve MaxMSP compatibility in
Cyclone without breaking Pd patches (with average~ as an example):

- MaxMSP compatibility through an extra inlet / outlet
- MaxMSP compatibility available through an extra operational mode
- MaxMSP compatibility available through an extra class

All together, not really a mind-blowing result for a thread with so
many words, but at least it gives an overview of choices that people
would make. There's also Ico's suggestion to use an approach similar
to Pd-L2Ork's -legacy flag.

On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres
<porres at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hah. never mind. I forgot PD chooses compiled objects over abstractions so
>> you can’t do what I suggested anyway. Teach me to type before following my
>> own advice and “test it”.
>
>
> you can still give warnings, if that's the case; but this seems like a
> digression. Not sure if I get what katja raised btw, that we should be
> careful before adding stuff like the set message in [count~]? Sure, agreed.
> cheers