> > Hi Miller, > > Just very generally BTW: > Do you mean binary compatibility or patch compatibility? > Either way, what are your thoughts about the possibility of a future Pd-1.0 > which would break (some kind of) compatibility for the sake of > revolutionary progress? > > András
I'm unwilling to break either patch or binary compatibility - Pd's original purpose is for interactive music and art and there is a big repertory now depending on Pd to remain runnable. I'm willing to make minor compatibility changes protected by compatibility switches. Pd now maintains a global compatibility version number to try to facilitate this. (It was necessitated by two bugs in DSP objects, one rather serious, that I wanted to fix without breaking old patches that might depend on the buggy behavior.) On a side note, the reason I'm so slow to add fetures to Pd is that I want to be sure that everything I do is something I'm willing to maintain for as long as I can. cheers Miller _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
