> cause I'm expecting the object to behave as it should
more precisely, you're expecting the object to behave as YOU THINK it should ;-). But you're right that this discussion can go on forever. I just want to point out a last time that there's a difference between a bug and improper documentation. For example there's a technical reason why for computing audio in blocks, the reading onset for [vd~] would be less than the buffer size of [delwrite~] (especially when deliberately increasing the block size). This is totally logical and problems only arise because of vague terms like 'maximum delay time'. So it's not that the behaviour of [vd~] is wrong, but the helpfile - and that's an important difference!
Regarding the behaviour of overlapping subpatches you just have to accept how Pd works. Changing its behaviour will break hundreds of patches.
To repeat myself, I personally think most of what you declare as a 'bug' is just a matter of missing or misleading documentation.
Cheers
PS: I'm not claiming the last word on this subject
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. September 2015 um 18:54 Uhr
Von: "Alexandre Torres Porres" <porres@gmail.com>
An: "Christof Ressi" <christof.ressi@gmx.at>
Cc: Pd-List <pd-list@lists.iem.at>
Betreff: Re: Re: [PD] more delay weirdness
2015-09-24 9:53 GMT-03:00 Christof Ressi
<christof.ressi@gmx.at>:
If my last post felt like a repression, I deeply regret that!
no worries ;) just had to bring it up.