--- On Tue, 2/15/11, Mathieu Bouchard <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Mathieu Bouchard <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PD] FLOSS book Lists chapter > To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Hans-Christoph Steiner" <[email protected]>, [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, February 15, 2011, 7:19 PM > On Sun, 13 Feb 2011, Jonathan Wilkes > wrote: > > > As well as in svn, where, for example, list-abs is in > the abstractions folder, but there are plenty of libraries > in "externals" that are made up only of abstractions. > > That might because it's forbidden for any externals to be > in the abstractions folder. I once tried to include 1 % of C > code in an abstractions library I had put in abstractions/ , > and was told I had to move it out. Preventively, people can > put abstractions libraries in externals/ so that they never > have to move them. > > Does that seem like an accurate hypothesis ? Yes. > > What else would be a reason to put those libraries in > externals/ ? > > >>> I say that even though at the implementation > level, abstractions aren't classes, for the user, it works > like a class. Also there are many externals that don't > include abstractions but are nonetheless compatible with Pd > vanilla. > >> > >> What part of the text are you referring to, in > particular ? > > > > The last sentence states that list-abs "doesn't > require any externals so that it is compatible with vanilla > Pd as well". > > Yeah, that's nonsense. Pd-vanilla is the origin of the > <m_pd.h> interface for making externals. Btw-- the manual makes a distinction between "abstractions" and "externs". > > The idea of Vanilla-without-externals is probably most > useful to ZenGarden users, who can't compile any existing > externals, because ZenGarden was designed to be incompatible > with Pd-Vanilla. It is because of this incompatibility, that > Zengarden users are led to excessively focus on what's > compatible with Vanilla-without-Externals, because that's > all that the ZenGarden project aims to support. > > Just another hypothesis. What do you think ? I think it's useful to people doing stuff with audio who want to learn Pd without being surrounded by a haze of thousands of possibly useful, possibly buggy, poorly documented object classes that may or may not be usable for someone on a different machine. The danger, however, is that one can end up arbitrarily limiting the types of projects one does to a narrow subset that fit the types of tools available with "Pd-minus-externals"*. Then again maybe the limited set of tools is what attracts that user in the first place... * "Puritan Data"? -Jonathan > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > | Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- > Villeray, Montréal, QC > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
