Martin Peach wrote: > IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: >> Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >>> I am fine with leaving the string patch in this release as it is if >>> it will be compatible with a generic approach to defining new atoms >>> types. Can anyone speak to that? >> >> does the patch still register the "string" keyword? (and in doing so >> breaks all other objects that use [string( without the string-atomtype?) >> > > The latest version registers the "blob" keyword instead, but I think it > is not necessary for it to register a name at all. >
exactly! the entire keyword thing is rather a mess anyhow, and i don't think it should be mimicked anywhere. introducing a new atomtype should be enough. gfmadsr IOhannes _______________________________________________ PD-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
