19 Oct
2012
19 Oct
'12
4:45 p.m.
On 10/19/2012 03:02 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
why would you want to keep OSCx alive? i would rather entirely remove this buggy and un-maintained (as in: upstream, not within PdX) library from any distribution.
Its still widely used and still the easiest way to use OSC, albeit in a limited way. If someone makes comparably easy way to use OSC, then I see no reason to keep this one.
here's 2 abstractions that implement OSCx's [sendOSC] and [dumpOSC] in terms of vanilla/mrpeach objects.
[OSCroute] cannot really be implemented in vanilla due to it's multi-outlet nature. otoh, [routeOSC] is compatible with [OSCroute] (apart from the name).