On Feb 17, 2009, at 3:45 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Roman Haefeli hat gesagt: // Roman Haefeli wrote:
now, that pd has its own [pow~], why not just using that? yeah, it takes a bit more time to write the abstractions, but then they are more vanilla friendly.
But that's exactly why I brought this topic up and asked: What to do about pow~?
Because of the reversed inlets you cannot use the buildin pow~ when importing Max-patches without breaking the patch.
I think, the smartest thing would be to use the builtin pow~, but reverse the *connections* made to it. Because that's what I'd have to do manually now after importing a Max patch with cyclone.
An alternative would be to rename the pow~ in cyclone to something like [max_pow~] or [Pow~] and use that instead when importing.
This breaks old patches that rely on cyclone's [pow~]. This is a problem that many people have addressed in languages like python, java, ruby, etc. The solutions generally look very similar, from what I have seen, so I think we should learn from their experience.
The last major piece of the puzzle is making loaded binary objectclass names be in the canvas-local namespace, just like abstractions are now. Unfortunately, that's not so easy to write. But I think its the right thing to do.
.hc
I suppose the connection-mangling is not trivial to write and as only this one object is affected, it may be easier to just do it manually when needed. The feature, that Pd now reports overwritten classes is very useful for spotting such differences.
Ciao
Frank
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Man has survived hitherto because he was too ignorant to know how to realize his wishes. Now that he can realize them, he must either change them, or perish. -William Carlos Williams