Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > On May 4, 2007, at 3:46 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > >> Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >> >>>> AFAIK it does not work yet - but it should not be that hard to >>>> implement ... >>> >>> That does not work and would be a pain to implement. >> >> why? >> >>> >>> I think that there should just be a libdir called "gemabs" for those pd >>> patches. If Gem was compiled as single-file-single-class, then this >>> would "just work". >>> >> >> since Gem objects do share a lot of code, even splitting Gem into a lot >> of separate objects (which is planned on the long term) will still need >> a "core" which i would implement as a (very small) Gem.pd_linux > > > I think that the way that Thomas did it with flext makes a lot of > sense. He made a flext.so and had the objects link to that DLL. That > should work fine with Gem. It could be something like > libgem.so/libgem.dylib/libgem.dll >
this is just another option. still it does not answer the question "why does it not work and why would it be a pain to implement?" ma. IOhannes _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
