I think we should think of Pd as a platform and all of the objects
that people have written as libraries. Sticking to only the objects
in the core of Pd means that you are reinventing the wheel again and
again. If someone has written it and documented it, then use it, and
spend your time making something new.
This is the idea that drives me to work on Pd-extended. And in the
process, I've found a lot of amazing code that I never would have
written. But now I can easily use it, play with it, etc. And I can
also easily install it on someone else's computer and show them too,
or even send them my patch, and it'll work.
Then when we have a Pd platform, then a patch can be an application.
Just like java, once its installed, all you need to do is run one
file and it can draw on the whole package.
.hc
On Apr 11, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote:
hi all
more and more i realize that i can do most basic things in pd
without externals. before all, the introduction of [list] made many
objs of externals, that i used a lot, obsolete. one (in my eyes)
basic task remains uncovered by list: splitting symbols into lists
(e.g. separated by a separator-char). it would be very nice, if
this could be done in future versions of pd. i really like the idea to be independent from externals as far as
it is possible, mainly for reasons of portability. even if i could
reach the same with less code, i'd prefer the solution built with
only natives. are there good reasons against this idea?roman
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list
"[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are
deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from
scarcity."
-John Gilmore