On Sun, 01 Jul 2007, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Chris McCormick wrote: > >On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 01:29:40PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > >>Anyway, seriously, if you wanted [unpost] as an external > >>for Miller's pd, you can't, because Miller rejected the > >>sys_printhook patch in 2004. > > > >Maybe it would go in now that there is this excellent > >concrete example of being able to catch and process errors in-patch. > > If it makes sense to you that excellent concrete examples can push > new features into pd, I cannot help your case. It doesn't work that > way.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 01:51:21AM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > It's very possible for you to transfer the features. You only have to > rewrite the code the way that Miller wants them to be written like. So why don't more people do that? Rewrite the code the way [they think] Miller wants instead of forking their own incompatible version of Pd? Best, Chris. ------------------- http://mccormick.cx _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
