I'd probably got for adding arguments to the Vanilla version of [wrap], even though it's quite simple arithmetic to work it up there's no reason not to change that. Particularly if it keeps it's current settings as defaults.
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 22:29:48 +0100 From: zmoelnig@iem.at To: pd-list@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD] A present
Quoting "cyrille henry" ch@chnry.net:
zmoelnig@iem.at a écrit : ...
should be fairly simple to write an abstraction that wraps
vanilla's [wrap] into the zexy version.wrap is problematic, because if you use the zexy version, and then
use your patch on an other computer without zexy : you will not have
any warning and your patch may not work.i know,l but i cannot do anything short of rolling back the time.
usually, you have an error because of missing object...
i would suggest that the vanilla [wrap] should refuse to create (or at
least throw a serious warning) when it is invoked with arguments.or even better: the vanilla wrap would just clone the behaviour of
zexy's wrap. while the code for it is right now GPL, i would consider
dual-licensing it under BSD in order to get it into vanilla :-)fgamsdr IOhannes
fgmar IOhannes
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Use Hotmail to send and receive mail from your different email accounts http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394592/direct/01/