Yes, I would, as they fill language gaps :) While we're at it, toss in the IEM stuff (soundfile_info, iemguts, etc).
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancs...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Would you make use of the following if they were included in Pd vanilla? > > * symbol2list > * initbang and closebang > * a way to read a text file that's guaranteed to not generate a bad > argument > error > > -Jonathan > > > > --- On *Thu, 12/16/10, brandon zeeb <zeeb.bran...@gmail.com>* wrote: > > > From: brandon zeeb <zeeb.bran...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [PD] PD OOP? > To: "Mathieu Bouchard" <ma...@artengine.ca> > Cc: "PD List" <pd-list@iem.at> > Date: Thursday, December 16, 2010, 1:45 AM > > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Mathieu Bouchard > <ma...@artengine.ca<http://mc/compose?to=ma...@artengine.ca> > > wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, brandon zeeb wrote: > > do you, really ? > > > Why are people getting offended here? > > > Am I getting offended ? How would you know, anyway ? > > > Well, you're certainly argumentative :-/ > > > Having to reinvent all that's outside of pd-vanilla is a more severe > information overload. > > If your background is in software development, then you know that you > should rely on libraries to get stuff done. > > > I use Pd to help learn these basics, and I will use pd-extended when I've > mastered the basics. > > > But, as I said, many of what I consider to be basics are outside of > pd-vanilla (while several things in pd-vanilla are rarely ever used by > anyone). > > > Relying on the pre-baked solution that is pd-extended doesn't make for a > very rewarding learning experience. Yet, if I were being paid for this, I > would definitely be making use of pd-extended because as you mentioned, my > primary motivation would be getting stuff done. As a software developer, > I'm keen on avoiding the reliance on superfluous dependency, and right now > pd-extended is just that. > > With that in mind, what's the point in using a pre-baked filter if I > haven't created my own > > > It's so that you don't have to create your own. > > > As I mentioned, I do want to create my own... to learn. > > > Using IoC / Strategy, you create your abstraction and pass a symbol > referencing the metronome you want to use. > > But you can also create the [metro] outside of the object, provided that > you have an inlet in the abstraction that accepts the bangs, and zero, one > or two outlets for connecting back to [metro] depending on needs. Isn't that > IoC ? > > > Yes, that would be a fine example when the payload is rather simple, and > when tilde~ objects aren't involved (block delay!). Anything beyond 1 or > two outlet/inlet pairs would probably be too cryptic for my uses, but the > same would go for creation style IoC. > > > > In Java / Spring IoC psuedocode: > > > No idea what Spring is... and it doesn't seem to be used in your > pseudocode, does it ? > > > Most Java classes used in Spring follow that example with setters for most > dependencies. With regards to IoC, Spring is the agent that deals with > creating objects, resolving setter and constructor dependency, and > connecting them together. This is accomplished either through XML, > annotations, or simple code (as in my example, where I'm instantiating the > objects myself). > > -- > Brandon Zeeb > > > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@iem.at <http://mc/compose?to=pd-l...@iem.at> mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > > -- Brandon Zeeb
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list