On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 09:48 +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > Roman Haefeli wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 15:48 -0400, marius schebella wrote: > > > how important is the portability between pd-extended and > > pd-vanilla/externals considered? any solution, that involves the > > [mylib/myclass] scheme creates patches, that are broken on a pd > > installation with multiclass externals. > > at the beginning of this discussion (probably 2002 or so; i have no > idea) i posted a diff for Pd that would allow this: using > [mylib/myclass] after loading the multiclass-library "mylib" containing > the class "myclass". > > the patch never got accepted (iirc, the arguing was that nameclashes > have to be solved on a social level rather than on a technical one)
if i would have known, that this would be possible and that a patch is _already_ written, i probably wouldn't have suggested to drop the multiclass external format. right now i think, your (obviously old) idea seems to be a very good solution. too bad, that it didn't make it into miller's pd. > anyhow, feel free to make Gem a single object per file library :-) gotcha. i haven't thought about that. roman ___________________________________________________________ Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list