2018-01-12 7:49 GMT-02:00 Derek Kwan derek.x.kwan@gmail.com:
Say for some reason somebody really likes cyclone's hilbert~ and wants to basically ignore the existence of vanilla's hilbert~ so they add cyclone to their path and every time they type in [hilbert~] they want the cyclone one. Under Alex's rules, they keep ending up with vanilla's hilbert and they have no idea why and no good way to get around it, short of deleting vanilla's hilbert~, which I'd argue would be the more destructive and less optimal choice. I think the user should have the power to do what they want. I've at least gotten frustrated using software that overly restricts the user in terms of what they think is safe and proper use case.
I didn't really want to discuss cyclone here, as I think it is not the main focus of this thread at all, but here we go... For cyclone, we actually have many many objects with the same name as vanilla ones, such as [line~], [append], [biquad~], [clip], [clip~], [pow~], [table] and now... perhaps... a new one called [hilbert~].
The thing is we're not overriding any of them automatically and kinda went for a hack to not let this happen on purpose, basically because all of these are not compatible to the vanilla ones and it'd be just also restrictive to users to not let them not override the objects if they don't want to... so say someone doesn't like cyclone's biquad~ or say someone is opening a patch from someone else that uses the vanilla biquad~ one...
For that, we have a very clear documentation in cyclone telling you how to load the object without overriding the vanila ones and it's been like that in cyclone actually since the beginning of times, in the early two thousands... And, well, I just think it is good to keep it that way.
cheers