I agree the “64” naming, while technically correct, will just get mixed up with architecture.
Too bad “dp” is already used by pddp. I now think of “wide” pd but that’s perhaps too general, although could be fun. enohp ym morf tnes ----------- Dan Wilcox danomatika.com robotcowboy.com > On Jun 5, 2023, at 12:00 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2023 11:44:54 +0200 > From: IOhannes m zm?lnig <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PD-dev] double precision pd? > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" > >> On 6/4/23 17:22, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote: >> well, great then, cause it's been merged :) time to get ready for double >> precision finally then I guess! Really excited about it <3 > > > the other question that ought to answered is: how do we actually call it > in order to prevent confusion? > > "Pd double precision" is a bit clumsy. > > "Pd64" is terser ("pd64.exe", "libpd64.dll"; and that's what I called > the tentative double-precision packages for Debian/Ubuntu/... for now) > but of course there might be some confusion with amd64/x86_64/arm64... _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
