On Jan 13, 2014, at 5:05 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 01/13/2014 03:11 PM, Dan Wilcox wrote: >> Woops, forgot the reply-all. >> >> On Jan 13, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Sorry, I don't know quite what you're referring to here. The only two >>> examples I gave-- $@ and [initbang] wouldn't change anything in the DSP >>> core. >> >> I wasn't referring to anything in particular, only in general. > > Then what do you think of "$@" or [initbang]? Are there good reasons for > them not being in the core? What about infinite undo? Or symbols that don't > cause memory leaks? Those would definitely be nice to have. I don't know what $@ refers to, is it the object arguments as a list? >>>> On Jan 13, 2014, at 1:54 AM, Jonathan Wilkes <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Yes. Everything is still there. It merely abstracts sending messages and >> midi into and out of the libpd instance. I don't see why we couldn't do the >> same with what's needed by an external gui wrapper around it. > > Hm... I didn't realize that. That being the case, you could certainly go > ahead and figure out some interim way of sending and parsing tcl messages > using whichever gui toolkit you prefer. However, it's worth understanding a > bit about why Pd-l2ork has diverged somewhat from the code you'd be wrapping > (in no particular order, and definitely not exhaustive): [snip] That's all good info to know, thanks. I'd imagine libpd would't need to handle *move functions though. Does the dsp graph rely on positioning? I thought only via connections. I'd imagine the gui wrapper should only worry about positioning and simply update those changes when saving. -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
