Hallo, Thomas O Fredericks hat gesagt: // Thomas O Fredericks wrote:
Well, the examples with more than one folder depth are not of concern. Just limit the search to one depth.
Okay, one level could work for "extra". It would break how pd-extended is built however.
Also, asking the authors of the conflicting objects/abstractions is much less work than building a mega-meta-system. After, that, the cvs "law" could simply state that no now object/abstraction may have the same name at the first depth level (or second depth depending on your persepective).
I'm not too confident about this "ask the authors" as that didn't work out in the past (10 years). I think, for Pd a "mechanisms not policy" guideline as the Lua people have works better. Without policy the risk of automatically searching one additional level is that nameclashes are easier again, even with only one level, because extra/a/x.pd and extra/b/x.pd both can exist on one harddisk without problems and we have two [x] again.
So only objetcts/abstractions named extra/*/*.pd, extra/*/*.dll, extra/*/*.pd_linux or extra/*/*.pd_darwin
Also, please quoting pdmtl abstractions. If you require more information about them, please visit the documentation website. The cvs version is outdated, and since there is talking of making a svn system, they will be integrated properly then.
Ah, I'm very sorry. I was only looking at how it's in CVS and pd-extended and now I see that you've dropped the second-level directories.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__