Miller,

If you look through the pd-l2ork C code, which is by and large near identical (at least in its core) to pd vanilla (except for comments I added while studying the code) you will find a few places where mainly due to the way pd handles GOP it is easier to simply catch a tcl/tk command than go through all the trouble of making sure the call is sane. The rest of the code contains a series of sanity checks I added and as such spews no tcl/tk warnings or errors. I suspect this would be trivial to merge with your code base.

Best wishes,

Ico

Ivica Ico Bukvic, D.M.A
Composition, Music Technology
Director, DISIS Interactive Sound & Intermedia Studio
Director, L2Ork Linux Laptop Orchestra
Assistant Director, CCTAD
Virginia Tech
Department of Music
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0240
(540) 231-6139
(540) 231-5034 (fax)
disis.music.vt.edu
l2ork.music.vt.edu
ico.bukvic.net

Mathieu Bouchard <matju@artengine.ca> wrote:
Le 2011-12-26 à 14:33:00, Miller Puckette a écrit :

> I read the thread on the bug tracker.  It looks like this is an old bug
> that manifests itself worse in 0.43 because its error recovery for
> TCL commands coming from Pd isn't as good as 0.42 was.

What you need is not as much error recovery as error reporting. Do 
whatever is necessary so that future bug reports are easier to make. For 
example, when a Tcl command fails, print the command that directly caused 
that error, even when -d is set to 0.

> Unless someone knows how to make a tcl interpreter ignore errors when 
> executing scripts I don't know how to return to the more fail-soft 0.42 
> way.

Isn't that what the [catch] command already does ?

But if anything prevents an item from being created, this will necessarily 
cause
more errors later, for any tcl command that assumes that the 
creation command worked.


| Mathieu BOUCHARD ----- téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 ----- Montréal, QC

Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list