Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Jun 15, 2010, at 6:58 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
On 2010-06-15 12:48, Matteo Sisti Sette wrote:
don't mistake "bad practice IMHO" for "bad practice".
Of course. But I meant, "do you really think that....?"
me too.
fgmasdr
IOhannes
Yes, I really think that its bad practice to have multiple objects use a
single help patch. We talked about this at length in the PDDP
meetings. It makes things confusing to newbies and it usually means the
shared help patches don't illustrate the individual objects well. The
only reason to do it that way is laziness IMHO.
Well the original post related to [routeOSC] and [unpackOSC] using the
same help file. I did that because [unpackOSC] is fairly useless on its
own and [routeOSC] won't work without [unpackOSC] ahead of it. Also
[slipenc] and [slipdec] are easier to demonstrate using a single help
patch. Is having two identical patches with different names somehow
better? If I use class_sethelpsymbol the user will get the correct help
patch if they right-click 'help'. I suspect most peeps do it that way
instead of drilling down into the externals looking for help patches.
Martin
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
