Hi Kyle, I thought of doing that, but reconsidered because it seems like it might lead to versioning problems, namespace clashes, multiple copies of objects and possibly, dogs and cats sleeping together.
Or am I over-thinking it? Phil Kyle Klipowicz wrote: > Hi Phil~ > > Perhaps you could repackage the polyWaveSynth with the required > abstractions included, since they are very small in size to make much > of a difference? This might eliminate much of the frustration that > seems to be plaguing some people. > > ~Kyle > > On 9/9/07, Frank Barknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hallo, >> Luigi Rensinghoff hat gesagt: // Luigi Rensinghoff wrote: >> >> >>> i was curious to check out that synth, but i get this error. >>> >>> the screenshot i from ubuntu, but it was the same on OS X. >>> >> You can fix this by adding your polyWaveSynth directory to your >> pd-path or copy over poly*.pd to that director.y As polypoly.pd lives >> in a different directory from polyWaveSynth, it cannot find the >> objects it creates dynamically. (I'm not sure, if it *should* see >> them, though, i.e. if this is a bug in Pd.) >> >> Ciao >> -- >> Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> [email protected] mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
