On Tuesday 21 August 2007 19:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > as frank has said, at the same time we could make sure that we are > running an actual version of Pd (or try, whether the requested feature > is already implemented...) :-)
I've only just updated to 0.40. So far it's just solved two of my problems in a row. It's like a goldmine. So following this pattern, will 0.42 be a compatibility-breaking redesign replacing insane messages with LISP-like lists of lists and atoms? > it would be interesting how you acchieve the required functionility > with nested abstractions. i cannot think how you do that... I only remember that that's how I once managed to achieve the goal I needed to at the time. It may not have been doing exactly that. robert. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
