cool, I also made a comment about it on the pull request, so if you accept my documentation fix, you can also sort this other issue out.

I also fixed some typos, using " instead of `` - please check my last pull requests at https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pulls for these things, they're all minor cosmetic fixes like that, plus this documentation fix.

After the release, I'd like to propose other documentation fixes, in which we should better discuss and sort it out first, as an outcome of long discussions we've been having.

cheers

2017-08-11 0:34 GMT-03:00 Miller Puckette <msp@ucsd.edu>:

Yes - Pd looks in the directory of the patch whether or not '.' is specified.
Adding '.' makes Pd look in the current directory of teh Pd process. I believe
this only makes sense if Pd is launched from the command line or a shell
script or a Windows "shortcut".

Using "." in this way is almost always confising - perhaps the best thing to
say about it is that it's useful for back compatibilty only.
means

cheers
Miller
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:44:50PM -0300, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> 2017-08-10 21:18 GMT-03:00 Miller Puckette <msp@ucsd.edu>:
>
> > unless someone else can figure this out I'll just release it in its
> > current almost-working state.
> >
>
> Seems Dan was on it, huh?
>
> Anyway, I'm also proposing some changes to the manual.
>
> It was originally saying Pd does not use the "Path" mechanism to search for
> files and externals when you use a slash declaration: "/" - such as
> "../sounds/sample1.wav" or "../cyclone/cycle~"
> But it actually does use the Path, so I changed it.
>
> I'm also not sure about this bit:
>
> *Pd does not automatically look in the current directory however; to enable
> that, include "."*

>
> This seems to be wrong, as Pd will automatically look in the current
> directory regardless if you are including "." or not
>
>
> right?
>
>
> cheers