Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On 24.09.2018 15:45, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: If not, is it possible for the user to make these file associations? For the File Manager, in Dolphin "pd" is the application associated with the file the file-association should be for "pd-gui" rather than "pd" (the Pd-GUI has all the logic to

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On 2018-09-24 14:55, Max wrote: > On 24.09.2018 14:23, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: >> On 2018-09-24 14:11, Max wrote: >>> On 24.09.2018 13:01, Dan Wilcox wrote: you can always double click the directory itself and launch things via the file explorer if you want multiples from there >>>

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On 24.09.2018 14:23, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: On 2018-09-24 14:11, Max wrote: On 24.09.2018 13:01, Dan Wilcox wrote: you can always double click the directory itself and launch things via the file explorer if you want multiples from there I think there is no consistent cross-platform

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Pd-L2Ork offers -unique startup flag that leverages Tcl/Tk's ability to share variables across multiple apps. By default it tries to open patches in an existing instance to prevent newcomers who tend to open patches by double-clicking on icons from opening multiple instances of Pd-L2Ork and

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On 2018-09-24 14:11, Max wrote: > On 24.09.2018 13:01, Dan Wilcox wrote: >> you can always double click the directory itself and launch things via >> the file explorer if you want multiples from there > > I think there is no consistent cross-platform behavior in this regard. > While on MacOS this

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On 24.09.2018 13:01, Dan Wilcox wrote: you can always double click the directory itself and launch things via the file explorer if you want multiples from there I think there is no consistent cross-platform behavior in this regard. While on MacOS this will open in the same Pd instance, Linux

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

t; Subject: Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, > why? > Message-ID: <20180923203248.gd30...@ucsd.edu > <mailto:20180923203248.gd30...@ucsd.edu>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > actually, it's probably not a serious problem that one

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Miller do you mean to extend the single-open mechanism from the doc files to the 'file>open' menu? Like when you try to open a C file in Geany while it is already open, Geany will pop the existing one rather than open a second instance. For a code editor that makes sense. And Pd is a code editor

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

anyway, this seems to be gone in the last test5 version, right? so does it mean the entry "Opening patches from menu, command line, or messages to "pd" first check of the file is already open and if so only bring the existing patch to front." in the release notes is no longer true? Em dom, 23 de

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Em dom, 23 de set de 2018 às 17:35, Miller Puckette escreveu: > actually, it's probably not a serious problem that one can multiply open > help > files (if one really wants to), so probably it's not worth fixing this. > > On the other hand, a naive user on a Mac would expect that clicking on a >

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

actually, it's probably not a serious problem that one can multiply open help files (if one really wants to), so probably it's not worth fixing this. On the other hand, a naive user on a Mac would expect that clicking on a file in the "finder", if Pd already has the file open, would show the user

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Thanks Miller for this quick yet powerful fix. It currently operates on patches as opened from the window menu. Help patches can still be opened more than once from the contextual menu. I verified that this can be fixed by calling glob_open() instead of glob_evalfile() from open_via_helppath() in

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

thanks Miller, it works perfectly! Antoine Rousseau http://www.metalu.net __ http://www.metaluachahuter.com/ Le dim. 23 sept. 2018 à 00:37, Miller Puckette a écrit : > Well, I ended up simply reverting to the old

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Well, I ended up simply reverting to the old behavior but leaving a hook in so that users can specifically ask only to open a patch once. cheers M On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 12:10:01AM +0200, Antoine Rousseau wrote: > Yes I realized that. So it should be something more specific. > Why not a wider

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Yes I realized that. So it should be something more specific. Why not a wider scope object, like [pdconfig], that would take "once" as an argument? Antoine Rousseau http://www.metalu.net __ http://www.metaluachahuter.com/

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 23:29 +0200, Antoine Rousseau wrote: > Of course [once] would be much better than [lock] [once] is taken by iemlib. Not that I think every library in existence should be considered regarding name conflicts when introducing new objects to Pd, but I feel that [once] is in

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

thers that I never thought it was a >> problem that you can open the same patch several times... if it's just for >> test tone patch, this could be solved in other ways. >> >> Christof >> >> > Gesendet: Samstag, 22. September 2018 um 22:53 Uhr >> >

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

e patch several times... if it's just for > test tone patch, this could be solved in other ways. > > Christof > > > Gesendet: Samstag, 22. September 2018 um 22:53 Uhr > > Von: oliver > > An: Pd-list > > Betreff: Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden i

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 23:11 +0200, Christof Ressi wrote: > OTOH, I kind of agree with the others that I never thought it was a > problem that you can open the same patch several times... Me neither. I do think it should be allowed one way or the other. Having to use a flag for it (probably the

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

1) ugly workaround, make symlinks to the same patch so it can be opened (and then managed) via different filenames or directory names) 2) I could add a message to pd or perhaps a startup flag, or both, to switch the behavior on and off. 3) (I doubt this is a good idea) I could make it "0.48

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On 9/22/18 6:26 PM, Miller Puckette wrote: > Oh dear, I was worried this might cause problems. > > The rationale is that, especially for beginning users but often for > experienced ones, it is rarely desirable to have two copies of, for > instance, the test tone patch running at once. (An

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Sorry for reporting this so late in the test phase. One thing that surprises me is, why would it be considered an accident to open more than one instance of the same patch? This depends on the purpose of a patch or project. For the audio test it makes no sense indeed to open more than one. On the

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

> > when trying to load a patch twice, pd becomes unresponsive > I confirm that; whatever the decision, this doesn't seem to be a desirable behavior...;-) Antoine Rousseau http://www.metalu.net __ http://www.metaluachahuter.com/

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

I have to say I like the new feature and being able to avoid loading the same patch twice, even as an expert, so I guess a flag or something that allows us to configure this is fine. Em sáb, 22 de set de 2018 às 13:30, Miller Puckette escreveu: > Ah, yes, a fourth option: have a new "pd

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

ew feature is worth keeping, so long as there is some provision for multiple instances of the same patch. From: Pd-list on behalf of Miller Puckette Sent: 22 September 2018 17:27 To: IOhannes m zm??lnig Cc: pd-list@lists.iem.at Subject: Re: [PD] multiple instances

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Ah, yes, a fourth option: have a new "pd really-open" message to open a file without checking if it's a duplicate. cheers M On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 06:18:42PM +0200, IOhannes m zm??lnig wrote: > On 9/22/18 3:17 PM, katja wrote: > > Much to my alarm, Pd 0.49test3 prevents loading multiple

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Oh dear, I was worried this might cause problems. The rationale is that, especially for beginning users but often for experienced ones, it is rarely desirable to have two copies of, for instance, the test tone patch running at once. (An example from my own usage is that I have a "play" shell

Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

On 9/22/18 3:17 PM, katja wrote: > Much to my alarm, Pd 0.49test3 prevents loading multiple instances of > a patch, and release notes tell us that this is on purpose. funnily, i recently worked on a related regression where double-clicking on a Pd-patch (in your favourite Windows exploder)

[PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why?

Much to my alarm, Pd 0.49test3 prevents loading multiple instances of a patch, and release notes tell us that this is on purpose. Moreover, when trying to load a patch twice, pd becomes unresponsive in some cases. The new behavior is a show stopper for projects that rely on, or benefit from,