Why not simply use pd-l2ork?
-----Original Message----- From: pd-list-bounces@iem.at [mailto:pd-list-bounces@iem.at] On Behalf Of Hans-Christoph Steiner Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 2:23 PM To: Jonathan Wilkes Cc: pd-list@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD] enhance pd-extended with pd-l2ork featues ?
On 01/19/2013 02:14 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at To: pd-list@iem.at Cc: Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 1:33 PM Subject: Re: [PD] enhance pd-extended with pd-l2ork featues ?
I haven't heard any objections to including them. I agree, they are
nice
features. It is just a matter of someone doing the work of porting
those
changes to Pd-extended.
So you would be ok with adding a field to the widgetbehavior struct (or whatever its called)? Doesn't that break binary compatability?
I think many of his gui speedups are based off that.
Breaking binary compatibility is not something to do lightly. It creates
lot
of other headaches. Plus I don't think its necessary to speed up the GUI,
I
think there are better approaches.
.hc
-Jonathan
.hc
On 01/19/2013 12:22 PM, Fero Kiraly wrote:
Dear all,
I like features of pd-l2ork (cpoy&paste raw code, resizeable GUis..)
iThink it will be nice to 'extend' pd-extended with them. What do you think ? or is it problematic ?
fk
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list