On 05/10/2017 09:20 PM, Miller Puckette wrote: > I never thought about it - my original intent in -noloadbang was to allow one > to open a patch that might be crashing Pd somehow because of a loadbang > action (such as a batch process that automatically exits after a fixed time).
right. that's what i think as well; and that's why i also don't know whether it's a bug or not. > > I'm not sure what the correct behavior should be. > however: the behaviour did change between 0.46 and 0.47. older versions of Pd would *never* automatically emit a loadbang if the "-noloadbang" flag was given. gmdsar IOhannes
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
