hi all,
why on earth do we need two separate implementations of the abs~ class? They seem equivalent. And, after all, the abs~ is to be included in the Pd proper at some point...
Well, having namespaces in Pd would be a dream come true for some users (including myself), but from the pov of many more users it would have been much better, if the coders agreed to avoid name duplication at all costs, either merging their efforts, or using pre- or postfixes or whatever.
I think, even if there are namespaces, people mostly tend to ignore them, unless they are forced to comply.
Krzysztof
IOhannes zmoelnig wrote: ...
as a by-product, it is very likely that the (discussed) namespacing-mechanism ([zexy::abs~] vs. [Gem::abs~]) would have to be implemented anyway.