On Feb 3, 2013 2:05 PM, "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >________________________________
> > From: Ivica Bukvic <ico@vt.edu>
> >To: Roman Haefeli <reduzent@gmail.com>
> >Cc: pd-list <pd-list@iem.at>
> >Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 9:58 AM
> >Subject: Re: [PD] Apply missing
> >
> >
> >Those are a part of the undo on pd-l2ork, as is changing properties of any other object, such as canvas and array (unlike pd-extended that in many cases fails to even acknowledge that the patch has been altered and needs to be saved, needless to mention add such change to its 1-step undo queue, e.g. try changing canvas properties and undoing it).
>
> A clarification here-- if you make changes to an iemgui programmatically by sending
> messages to a receive-name, it doesn't get registered in the undo history.
> This is nice.  Because Pd is extremely limited in the GUI widgets it provides,
> many people abuse iemguis to make things like file choosers and pop-up
> menus, or even do GUI animations, which produce lots of "transient" changes
> to iemguiproperties

Yep. And that was a conscious decision to leave it that way.

>
>
> >It would be nice if not spreading FUD were added to the mailing list netiquette...
>
> I recently added to the netiquette guide in an attempt to make newcomers
> feel more welcome on the list.  The aim is to decrease
> posting anxiety, not increase it.  We should remember technology
> lowers the cost to assuming good faith when people are wrong in cases
> like this, so please remain lazy and resist the urge to endlessly
> loop in symbolic vigilance:
>
> [r reenter]
> |
> [spread FUD(
> |
> |     [r stop]
> |     |
> |     [bang; reenter But I'm acting in bad faith so why do I care about not spreading FUD?(
> |     |
> |     [t b b]
> |     |    /
> [until]   /
> |        [add2 in bad faith(
> |       /
> |      /
> |    /
> |  /
> |/
> [Netiquette guide says Don't spread FUD(
> |
> [s stop]
>
> -Jonathan
>