Ugh.
Dear list members, Do you see a problem with the development process that is implied in this thread? If so, PM me and describe (but please do not rationalize) what you think the problem is.
I can't say it will help improve anything about this (non-)development process, but it will help me retain my sanity. :)
Thanks, Jonathan
On Thursday, October 9, 2014 3:06 AM, Frank Barknecht fbar@footils.org wrote:
Hi,
indeed: the code in question has been implemented several times in various external libraries, so adding it to the main binary of a pd-fork would just create an unnecessary incompatibility to vanilla core objects, but not gain anything at all.
Frank
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 02:44:54PM -0400, Dan Wilcox wrote:
Sure, but we're referring to pd-vanilla.
On Oct 2, 2014, at 6:00 AM, pd-list-request@lists.iem.at wrote:
If that's all [list foreach] is supposed to do I'll go ahead and implement this in Pd-l2ork [...]
-Jonathan