On 1/17/23 17:13, Miller Puckette via Pd-dev wrote:
- [pack~] and [unpack~] are of course natural names for these objects.
*unfortunately* i have added objects of the same name (but with different functionality) to zexy about 23 years ago. (the objects predate zexy's use of *any* VCS; but the copyright boilerplate says 2000/09/01 and i have no reason to distrust it). so i expect that either old patches that use zexy's [pack~]/[unpack~] are going to break, or the new multichannel [pack~]/[unpack~] won't be usable if zexy is loaded as a multi-object library.
Hmm... well, old patches should run OK if the lib is explicitly loaded. But it's a bother that new patches that pull zexy in explicitly won't be able to use pack~ and unpack~.
if possible i would like to avoid that.
The best solution I can think of is to either find a different (unused) name for the new pack~/unpack~ or
i would prefer this. howe about the [split~]/[merge~] pair suggested by Jean-Yves?
to offer a new name to zexy's versions (and keep the old ones too, perhaps in a separate "library").
i'm mostly concerned about embedding old abstractions (that use zexy's [unpack~]/[pack~]) that are to be embedded in new patches (that want to use multichannel capabilities), so the two should be able to co-exist.
in retrospect i wouldn't have named the zexy objects like i did, but i was young and needed the money.
gmdasr IOhannes