João Pais wrote: >> by any chance, you are not running an amd64 system? (this is getting >> hot ground for me, as i am not so sure whether PdX actually does have >> some x86_64 patches incorporated; but chances are low....) > > my new desktop is a 64 d-core intel, I have windows and ubuntu there.
i was trying to say that you are obviously not trying to run a native 64bit system (with a 64bit kernel and running Pd as 64bit application) the good thing about amd64/emt64 is, that they can also run 32bit (i386). anyhow, if you want to run Pd in as a native 64bit app, you will need Pd-0.41 > >> after all, if you don't need all the list-stuff and >> multiple-dollarg-expansion ($1-$2), you might as well not notice a >> difference between 0.39 and 0.40.... > > I can't even be sure of what you're talking about, so probably I don't > (or maybe I would, if I was aware of it?). Were they properly documented > somewhere? it's not necessarily a matter of documentation (though both have been discussed on this list so many times, that at least the list-archives should serve well as documentation :-)). what i wanted to say is, that if you don't care for any _new_ feature, then it is clear that you will not see a difference between a version w/ and one lacking these features. > their time [please don't bring up the "if they would really want it..." > argument]. pd-van should check that out and try to catch up at some time i am not trying to start another religious war here. mfg.asdf IOhannes _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
