On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 03:26:41AM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
As a human being, Miller has the right to reject patches. That doesn't
mean that as a human being I have the duty to enjoy it.
I genuinely believe that PureData is a fantastic piece of software in many
ways (else I surely
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
Let me take a quick example to illustrate my point :
(from s_inter.c, removed #ifdefs for this example)
void sys_set_priority(int higher)
{
struct sched_param par;
int p1 ,p2, p3;
p1 = sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_FIFO);
p2 =
Even considering the actual implementation instead of the simplifiedexample, I wouldn't consider that renaming p1 to priority_min is
really helping anyone, because they already know p1 is the minimumpriority by looking two lines above. All uses of p1 lie within 5 lines ofcode, so using a longer
I agree with this, from a non/novice programmer perspective. It would
make it a lot easier for me to learn the inner workings of Pd if it
were nicely labeled, and modularized.
It's so hard for me to just pick up and figure it all out! Even
taking computer science courses cannot prepare a
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
You didn't replace the fprintfs by posts. It should be posts because then
it can be routed through the GUI.
True.
Actually, they should be calls to error() or to pd_error(). The latter
should be used when there's an object associated with the
An explicit name saves the dev brain power at coding time ;)
I assert that often it doesn't. A name shouldn't be more explicit than it
needs to be,
Quote from Wikipedia on software quality
= http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Names
yes, according to that page, Local variable
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 04:00:20AM +0200, Vincent Lordier wrote:
So it's basically up to Miller to let the development process change,
so we can propose improvements.
If not, then I guess I'll join the growing group of discouraged ones,
eventually.
I think you have hit the nail on the head
