On 02/17/2014 10:48 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
I think that the way forward with the pd/gui separation is to work on the low hanging fruit, things that are easy to fix. Let the hard parts for later, which will only be a couple areas.
So that means looking at everywhere where sys_gui() or sys_vgui() is called, and seeing how the raw Tcl in those calls can be converted into Tcl procs. The syntax for calling Tcl procs is very close to a Pd list, so that is an easy way to get close.
The Pd dev community has always been plagued with a desire for grand plans before starting work. And that has proven to mean nothing happens.
No sane person is going to do incremental work without a plan on GUI software in 2014 that only has a single undo.
-Jonathan
.hc
On 13/01/2014 15:32, Dan Wilcox wrote:
As Hans has proposed for years, IMO this is really the only way to perhaps solve the "PD gui development doesn't move fast enough" problem in the long term. In this case, Miller would have the core (in libpd) & the pd-vanilla wrapper gui formally separated while everyone else can then use the same libpd core within other flavors. The DSP core is the heart and soul and I see no reason to try and change that in any way.
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list