[PD] declare vs. namespaces - current best practice

[Lucas Cordiviola]

I steel believe that the “best practice” is [foo/obj]. At least for 
sharing patches. At home or with live-patching is another story.

The only things that needs to get fixed are some single binary libs. To 
put some random example some objects on iemlib already work with 
[iemlib/obj] and others don't.

Makes me think that if zexy and iemlib (and other single binary) support 
[foo/obj] every thing will be under control.

I'm not a Gem user so I don't know if it has potential name clashes



--

Mensaje telepatico asistido por maquinas.

On 1/6/2018 10:41 AM, Christof Ressi wrote:
>> (which actually might be tricky depending on platform/how their system is set up).
> exactly, that's why it's better not to make any assumptions. just tell users: "needs zexy, cyclone ..." and it's their responsibility to add the necessary search paths/load libs if necessary.
>
> and again:
>
>>> imagine you want to use both [foo/obj] and [bar/obj] in the same
>>> abstraction. how could you possibly force on or the other with
>>> declare?
>
>> Gesendet: Samstag, 06. Januar 2018 um 12:53 Uhr
>> Von: "Derek Kwan" <derek.x.kwan at gmail.com>
>> An: "Alexandre Torres Porres" <porres at gmail.com>
>> Cc: "Christof Ressi" <christof.ressi at gmx.at>, Pd-List <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
>> Betreff: Re: [PD] declare vs. namespaces - current best practice
>>
>>
>>>> And to come back to my first remark here on this thread, if
>>>> [declare] cannot always force a priority, shouldn't it?
>>> I don't think so. [declare]'s job is to add paths to the search path
>>> and load libraries. it has nothing to do with namespacing.
>>>
>>> imagine you want to use both [foo/obj] and [bar/obj] in the same
>>> abstraction. how could you possibly force on or the other with
>>> declare?
>>>
>> Well, I suppose one way of forcing the use of cyclone's gate without
>> typing out the entire thing and dealing with this whole namespacing
>> thing is to basically use the -noprefs flag when launching pd (and
>> assuming the people you are distributing the patch to have Pd somewhere
>> in their path which might be a big if, you can send along a shell script
>> that launches pd with that flag for them) and using [declare] to control
>> what gets loaded and what paths are added (which actually might be
>> tricky depending on platform/how their system is set up). And of course
>> not loading the prefs file affects more than just paths/loading...
>>
>> So maybe now that I type it out this isn't such a simple idea to
>> implement haha, but maybe it could be helpful for some use cases...
>>
>> Derek
>> -- 
>> Derek Kwan
>> www.derekxkwan.com
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list