On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres <por...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Now I have an object that is compiled as [==~], it's not part of a > library, and it loads and works on pd vanilla 0.46-7 64 bits, pd vanilla > 0.46-7 > 32 bits and also Pd-Extended 0.42-5 (*without* the need of the > [hexloader] object by the way). All you need is the ==~.pd_darwin object > in a search path. > > > Speaking and thinking as a user, I think it is easy and great to have a > working and compiled object that just loads and works, so that is what I 'm > after. > > But anyway, yeah, I wanna know what are the dangers and all... > > You're lucky that OSX accepts filenames like ==~.pd_darwin. Will it also accept *~.pd_darwin? Or <~.pd_darwin? Usually objects with weird names (names that are illegal as file names) need to be set up in a library first, so that their names can be registered without Pd having to search the filesystem for them. Martin
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
