Actually, if pd open did take an optional argument, this would be easy to handle ala:
All other calls to pd open should omit the extra argument and behave as before. I'd see this as a simple improvement for new users.
On Sep 24, 2018, at 5:55 AM, pd-list-request@lists.iem.at wrote:
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:32:48 -0700 From: Miller Puckette <msp@ucsd.edu mailto:msp@ucsd.edu> To: katja <katjavetter@gmail.com mailto:katjavetter@gmail.com> Cc: Pd-list <pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:pd-list@lists.iem.at> Subject: Re: [PD] multiple instances of a patch forbidden in 0.49, why? Message-ID: <20180923203248.GD30397@ucsd.edu mailto:20180923203248.GD30397@ucsd.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
actually, it's probably not a serious problem that one can multiply open help files (if one really wants to), so probably it's not worth fixing this.
On the other hand, a naive user on a Mac would expect that clicking on a file in the "finder", if Pd already has the file open, would show the user the open file instead of opening another copy.
Supposing the "open" menu called "pd open" with the third nonzero argument, but if "pd open" acted as it does now so that one could programmatically open multiple copies of a patch, would this permit you to do what you're planning? (I think that this would be patch-level back compatible).
cheers Miller
Dan Wilcox @danomatika http://twitter.com/danomatika danomatika.com http://danomatika.com/ robotcowboy.com http://robotcowboy.com/