This is a serious problem -- putting a backwards "pow~" into Pd might be worse than having none at all. But writing a book that uses "pow" backwards would be even worse than having one in Pd!
Maybe the "right" thing would be to use another name such as "power~".
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 05:16:08PM +0100, Andy Farnell wrote:
Yep. What is to be done about that? Should we keep to the conventions of vanilla and Pd generally by changing that?
I am torn on this. I would have a lot of rewriting to do but would like to see conventions observed.
OTOH, maybe compatibility with patches out there using Cyclone [pow~] should be respected as a priority.
BTW it's very important for to know. If it changes after I publish the book I will hire a bounty hunter to bring me the fingers of whoever made the changes :)
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:39:07 -0400 marius schebella marius.schebella@gmail.com wrote:
btw, are all pow~ objects reversed? right inlet^left inlet? marius.
Andy Farnell wrote:
Did I read that Cyclone is to be incorporated into vanilla Pd?
Having discovered too late that [pow~] is not part of vanilla I am about to remove the constraint of using vanilla Pd for the synthetic sound design book since it is incomplete without basic mathematical operators.
andy
-- Use the source
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list