If you really want to prepare against multi-object-per-binary VS single-object-per-binary problems, you should do: [declare -path foo -lib foo]. This ensures that object "bar" in library "foo" can be created in both cases, as long as it's typed as [bar]. [foo/bar] doesn't (usually) work for multi-object-per-binary libs, but here's a PR which would solve that: https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/630
Maybe [declare -lib foo] could also add "foo" to the search paths. Then we would have a unified syntax for "loading" libraries and people wouldn't have to care about implementation details. Just thinking out loudly.
Christof
Gesendet: Montag, 07. Oktober 2019 um 15:56 Uhr Von: "Peter P." peterparker@fastmail.com An: pd-list@lists.iem.at Betreff: Re: [PD] declare not posting library loading message while object creation does?
- Christof Ressi christof.ressi@gmx.at [2019-10-07 14:38]:
And this was sarcasm too.
damn, my sarcasm-O-meter failed miserably...
I was using [declare -lib hid] because this is how I load libraries in general.
"-lib" is only needed for multi-object-per-binary libraries, e.g. zexy and iemlib. [declare -lib hid] doesn't do anything useful, the external will be loaded anyway when you create it the first time...
As oliver kindly pointed out yes I do only load libs when they are needed by the patch. And I do so with [declare -lib] to make it well visible and have all libs loaded at one spot in the patch. At this point I don't want to care about the single-object-lib versus multi-object-lib difference which is the reason I started this thread. [declare] sadly behaves differently for these two cases, a situation which I think should be improved in order to make lib loading easier for novices.
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list