> > Please don't interprete what I'm gonna say as sarchastic or offensive > > to whom wrote the above sentence (which however has been suggested by > > more than one person). Just take it as a general and (hopefully) > > constructive discussion about PD issues... > > No offense taken. But since I have neither skills nor time to get > involved in PD development, I have to stay focused on certain things.
Yes of course. I didn't mean to criticize your suggestion: I meant to "criticize PD" that makes that suggestion necessary. Of course that IS a valid workaround in a lot of situations where the use of abstractions is not very extensive; it is just not feasible when you're developing some complex large scale application that you need also to mantain or further develop in the future. I do very much appreciate workarounds, and often need them too. I just think that the existence of a workaround is not an "excuse" to underestimate the importance of an issue - especially when the workaround only applies to a restricted range of cases. Bye m. -- Matteo Sisti Sette [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.matteosistisette.com _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
