On 01/13/2014 09:32 AM, Dan Wilcox wrote:
As Hans has proposed for years, IMO this is really the only way to
perhaps solve the "PD gui development doesn't move fast enough"
problem in the long term. In this case, Miller would have the core (in
libpd) & the pd-vanilla wrapper gui formally separated while everyone
else can then use the same libpd core within other flavors. The DSP
core is the heart and soul and I see no reason to try and change that
in any way.
Sorry, I don't know quite what you're referring to here. The only two
examples I gave-- $@ and [initbang] wouldn't change anything in the DSP
core.
On Jan 13, 2014, at 1:54 AM, Jonathan Wilkes <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
#2 is hard. Where would you start and how would you proceed?
I think what makes sense is to list out the main interfaces to the DSP
core that are currently being used by TCL.
I think by DSP core you're referring to:
* DSP graph stuff
* message dispatching system
* various widgetbehaviors and data structures parentwidgetbehaviors
* all the gui logic in g_editor.c
* gui queuing stuff, array selection/manipulation logic, mouse motion
callbacks, and probably other things I'm forgetting
Is this correct?
In the simplest case, we could literally create wrapper functions
which emulate the tcl argument lists. libpd currently wraps the formal
message sending, midi, & processing areas. I think now we need to see
if it's possible to wrap the DSP graph editing/manipulation, canvas,
patch loading/saving, etc.
I'm not clear on what libpd actually includes. For example, does all
the logic from g_editor remain intact?
-Jonathan
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
