Hallo, B. Bogart hat gesagt: // B. Bogart wrote:
cyrille henry wrote:
i don't fear redondancy.
Perhaps you don't but anyone who is learning PD should! Without consitancy and a lack of redundancy learning PD becomes a much more complex and confusing proposition.
Wherever possible objects with the same functionality should be unified.
I agree that this should be a goal for externals and built-in objects, however for abstractions I see it slightly different and I would rather support Cyrille's view. Although I abandoned Perl years ago, I may bring up the basic Perl philosophy axiom here: "There's more than one way to do it." I see it as part of the artistic freedom Pd offers to be able to do the same things in different ways - like it's part of artistic freedom to write yet another pop song about a broken heart.
We even have different versions of Pd: msp, devel, desiredata and now pd-extended. That's the way, the world is and thus it's the way, software is. With the Linux-kernel it's even worse than in our tiny Pd world.
Several of the [list]-abs are reimplementations of existing externals. Still I see a place for them, if alone because they are not externals.
Ciao