On 10/20/2012 04:07 AM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
> On 10/20/2012 01:26 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>> I'm not going to take on the maintenance of those patches, so just copying
>> them into Pd-extended is not an option.  I'm think Pd-extended should have an
>> 'oscx' compatible library , and 'oscx' is already there, tested, etc.
> 
> "etc" means "known to be buggy & unmaintained".
> 
> i'm not arguing against OSCx because of it's architectural flaws but because
> it's not working as it should.

I'd happily ditch it if there was a drop in replacement.  For example, I've
had many students come to me with the most popular Processing <--> Pd starter
patch, and its based on oscx.  If it wasn't include, that patch would not work
at all.  So buggy but working is still better than not at all.

.hc

_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev

Reply via email to