On Tuesday 21 August 2007 19:56, zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
as frank has said, at the same time we could make sure that we are running an actual version of Pd (or try, whether the requested feature is already implemented...) :-)
I've only just updated to 0.40. So far it's just solved two of my problems in a row. It's like a goldmine.
So following this pattern, will 0.42 be a compatibility-breaking redesign replacing insane messages with LISP-like lists of lists and atoms?
it would be interesting how you acchieve the required functionility with nested abstractions. i cannot think how you do that...
I only remember that that's how I once managed to achieve the goal I needed to at the time. It may not have been doing exactly that.
robert.