Hallo,
Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

> On Apr 8, 2009, at 5:35 AM, cyrille henry wrote:
>> i think for this specific lib, any dependency of object outside it's  
>> directory can be seen as a bug.
>
> I don't understand this at all.  Why did every modern operating system  
> spend massive amounts of work to switch from static linking of libraries 
> (i.e. including the library with the program itself) to dynamic, shared 
> libraries (i.e. a single copy of a library shared by all programs that 
> use it)?

I think, advantages and disadvantages have to be weighted, and IMO mapping
currently is leaning to a not very user friendly side. For example its use of
[float_argument], [symbol_argument] and [once] from purepd creates a dependency
on purepd that is completely unnecessary: [once] is only used once,
[symbol_argument] also, and float_argument very often is used where a simple [f
$1]  would be enough (its second argument is empty). So I'd say, get rid of it
and be more friendly to users. 

Another case is the "standardization" to use abstraction names, that require
the (sometimes broken) hexloader: Life would be much easier for a lot of people
without the "->" convention.

Other cases may not be so easy to fix and some externals are hard to replace,
but as it currenly is, mapping looks like a collection that puts some abstract
design principles higher than actual user demands. Of course that's just my
humble opinion, which is leaning to a much more simplistic side.

Ciao
-- 
Frank

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Reply via email to