Hallo, Roman Haefeli hat gesagt: // Roman Haefeli wrote:
without designing to much, how this collection could look like, there are might some little conventions, that we could make up (these are meant as proposals):
- finding a naming scheme, maybe using a prefix like dsp_**** (similar
to the list-abs).
I think, this might be done later with a simple directory-prefix. If the help-files themselves use the objects without any dir-prefix, then the name could be decided later and they would still be useable with standard methods of setting only the -path.
I didn't use a directory prefix, but instead a hardcoded prefix for [list]-abs mostly because many of them are impossible to use without the prefix anyways since they nameclash with existing objects like [list-moses] vs. [moses]. So "import list" doesn't make any sense for them. But for the dsp-collection I think, a directory prefix would make sense.
- using messages like 'frequency 123' to set parameters, which are
routed inside the abstraction. with such a design, only one inlet for an arbitrary number of parameters is needed.
Yes, that could be a kind of "good practice" recommendation. I do this in my personal abstractions a lot, where I now use the attached "dispatcher" to automate the creation of the necessary [route frequency] and [s $0-frequency] chains plus a tiny help-feature. (Requires pd-0.40 and up because of $1-$2)
- the helpfile should at least describe the available parameters and
their default values.
Yes++.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__