I see that the loader code in Miller's 0.40, Miller's 0.39 and devel_0_39 are completely different. This means that the diff between the first two and the diff between the latter two, have a lot of conflicts that can't be fixed without sitting down and figuring out what should be done.
So, my question is, is everybody satisfied by Miller's 0.40's s_loader.c ? If yes, then I can just use that. Else, how should some devel_0_39 features be added to it? I'm thinking specifically of the altname parameter, which doesn't appear at all in Miller's. What is it useful for?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada
I believe I tried to apply a patch that added the 'altname' business, which then caused some problems, so I rewrote the code to do the same thing better without the extra parameter. I think the string passed in devel_0_39 is simply passed as "classname" in 0.40. For instance, if someone asks for "doo/dah" in devel_0_39 you get "dah" for classname and "doo/dah" for altname; in 0.40 classname is "doo/dah".
cheers Miller
On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 10:43:47AM -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
I see that the loader code in Miller's 0.40, Miller's 0.39 and devel_0_39 are completely different. This means that the diff between the first two and the diff between the latter two, have a lot of conflicts that can't be fixed without sitting down and figuring out what should be done.
So, my question is, is everybody satisfied by Miller's 0.40's s_loader.c ? If yes, then I can just use that. Else, how should some devel_0_39 features be added to it? I'm thinking specifically of the altname parameter, which doesn't appear at all in Miller's. What is it useful for?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - t?l:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montr?al QC Canada
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Miller Puckette wrote:
I believe I tried to apply a patch that added the 'altname' business, which then caused some problems, so I rewrote the code to do the same thing better without the extra parameter. I think the string passed in devel_0_39 is simply passed as "classname" in 0.40. For instance, if someone asks for "doo/dah" in devel_0_39 you get "dah" for classname and "doo/dah" for altname; in 0.40 classname is "doo/dah".
how well does that handle a class called [/], such as the one used for division? can that one be namespaced like others?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada
The loader in 0.40 takes advantage of the canvas-local paths that were introduced in 0.40. Were any changes made to the loader in devel_0_39 after Thomas' code was included by Miller?
.hc
On Dec 9, 2006, at 10:43 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
I see that the loader code in Miller's 0.40, Miller's 0.39 and devel_0_39 are completely different. This means that the diff between the first two and the diff between the latter two, have a lot of conflicts that can't be fixed without sitting down and figuring out what should be done.
So, my question is, is everybody satisfied by Miller's 0.40's s_loader.c ? If yes, then I can just use that. Else, how should some devel_0_39 features be added to it? I'm thinking specifically of the altname parameter, which doesn't appear at all in Miller's. What is it useful for?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada_______________________________________________ PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. - Benjamin Franklin
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
The loader in 0.40 takes advantage of the canvas-local paths that were introduced in 0.40. Were any changes made to the loader in devel_0_39 after Thomas' code was included by Miller?
Miller added some changes, yes... the question is not due to someone changing devel_0_39 further, it's about how Miller integrated that code in 0.40; but also I'd like to know what were the intentions behind the original code, to see whether Miller's changes are well justified or not, so that I can figure out whether I just take Miller's, just take devel_0_39's, or blend the two.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada
-
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
Mathieu Bouchard -
Miller Puckette