Matju,
     Does the most recent version of GF post an informative message to the console when the user first
creates a [print] object?  (In 9.8 on winxp it doesn't.)  If not, it should.

Or, why don't you just call your object [post]?  That way when it replaces [print] there will be one less
character to type.

-Jonathan

From: Mathieu Bouchard <matju@artengine.ca>
To: Roman Haefeli <reduzierer@yahoo.de>
Cc: pd-list <pd-list@iem.at>; Kim Cascone <kim@anechoicmedia.com>; IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoelnig@iem.at>
Sent: Mon, June 14, 2010 1:41:25 PM
Subject: Re: [PD] plugin~ external

On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 11:34 -0700, Kim Cascone wrote:
>
> I fully agree with you. I find replacing built-in vanilla object classes a rather bad habit and quite confusing. I don't see a valid reason for doing that.

I don't see a valid reason for passing A_POINTER atoms around that aren't proper t_gpointer pointers, and I don't see a valid reason for [print] to say "consistency check failed" when it just doesn't know an atom type, and I don't see a valid reason for avoiding the addition of custom atom types in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.

  http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2002-08/007854.html
  http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2007-06/008995.html
  http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2008-07/012058.html
  (and so on)

> Since one needs to load 'gridflow' anyway to use GridfFlow, why not
> simply put a Gridflow specific print object when needed?

The goal is to replace [print]. If I just want a [print] but [print] can't be customised to work with the atom type I introduce, then the built-in [print] needs to be replaced. It should be as easy to understand as why we shouldn't need a [printfloat] to print floats, a [printsymbol] to print symbols, etc.

_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801