Hi,
Frank Barknecht a écrit :
I think, Pd could benefit a lot by providing a default scripting language to write operations like [range] which are tediuos to do as an abstraction. Altough I'm not a fan of Tcl (and would prefer Lua), Tcl would be a natural choice as it's available anyway. Ideally the scripts would be saved within the patch, e.g. inside message boxes. Oh wait, that's toxy! Hm, ... but toxy has a horrible syntax, which I could never get around. But the general approach of it is a fantastic idea.
Having a default scripting language is certainly the best thing that could happen to puredata, I think. We wouldn't have to deal anymore with externals and get headaches for manipulating strings, and (maybe) for custumizing our own widgets without having to touch pd.tk or compiling. The problem of toxy horrible synthax doesn't come from toxy but like almost everyone know, from puredata's 'dropped keycodes', so it would be the same with any other language wrapper that allow to store the code into the patch (just try to launch a sed command line with [shell] to have an idea...)
à plus
The advantages of a scripted Pd classes are: For certain tasks, especially those involving lots of repetition, patching is too much work. And as pd-extended shows, if you pack each and every external and abstraction into the pd-distribution, you either have to deal with ugly long names or live with namespace pollution.
Btw.: That's why today I tend to avoid installing lots of externals and rather copy them to a project's folder when needed. Apart from extensions that provide special functionality like Gem, msd, OSC or iemfilters, I don't use "convenience collections" like maxlib anymore
- expect my own of course. Joao would probably call me a hardcore
user. ;)
Ciao