matteo sisti sette wrote: > Hi, > > > Was this change intentional? Is there a reason so good to be worth > such a huge break in backward compatibility?
afair, this has been discussed on the list. the result of the discussion was: the new behaviour is more consistent with the general behaviour of the [list] object, and it is compatibile with similar objects that made this functionality available, e.g. zexy's [length] obviously it is incompatible. the reason to nevertheless do change it was, that [list length] was not introduced before 0.40, which keeps the potential number of victims low (esp. since Pd-extended has not yet made it so far); if the behaviour ever needs to be changed, better do it NOW than later. btw, in Pd's long history, i can only remember two (2!) objectclasses that have changed their behaviour (without changing the interface): [list length] and [atan2]. the latter was indeed disastrous, as [atan2] had been long introduced before, something [list length] is fortunately not yet. > > If so, the help patch should be updated. > definitely. fgmadsr. IOhannes _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
