Miller Puckette wrote:
I agree too... Whenever something is available in Max and also in clashing libraries, I'm thinking of figuring out the Max compatible one (probably this will always be the one in cyclone) and putting that in the Pd core.
Also, objects such as abs~, etc., which are in cyclone but seem canonical should go into Pd. I haven't decided wheether Pd should try to include the whole of cyclone or not.
also, I want to add a flag to Pd to supperss loading specific classes so that, when classes are added to Pd , they don't break existing libraries quite so badly.
cheers Miller
Fine, so I give up. No namespaces. Fine. So everybody's mind is made up. So much for that debate.
But it sure seems like encouraging "libraryname_objectname" aliases as in maxlib would go a long way to avoiding and providing a user-side method to resolve nameclashes, and allowing simultaneous (within the same patch or abstraction) usage of objects with identical root objectnames. Without "changing a line of code", by the way.
"one word - one object" - feh. Try that in a dictionary and see how far you get. As in real estate, context, context, context.