IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >> >> The current setup means that you can override a pd-vanilla >> abstraction using a binary class in ".", but you can't override a >> pd_vanilla binary using an abstraction in "." That seems to treat >> .pd objectclasses as second class classes and I don't like that ;) > > well, additional loaders are somewhere inbetween. > e.g. .pdlua in path1 will override .pd in path0 but will be overridden > by .pd_linux in path2. > which makes .pd a 3rd class citizen and .pdlua a 2nd class citizen. > > personally i think this is something i can live with. > what bothers me more is that .pd classes cannot "bypass" the > loader-mechanism (by registering the class).
Maybe compare with the abstraction cache patch I wrote a while ago, that has a similar observable result as a side-effect. http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2008-10/012334.html Claude -- http://claudiusmaximus.goto10.org _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
