On Nov 28, 2007, at 3:49 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
I am curious why you chose to make it a loader rather than to make
it part of the core???? just to refresh everyones memories: i have originally written the hexloader as a patch against pd-vanilla. zthe functionality was: setupfun-mangling and filename-mangling. this was in times before the sys_loader mechanism existed. miller then applied my patch (i think for pd-0.39, but i am not
sure about pd-versions). miller also applied tg's sys_loader patch. in the next release of Pd, the hexloader was reduced to setupfun- mangling only.i then thought (and still think) that miller has some reason to
reduce the hexloader-functionality in pd-core. however, at the same time he provides an alternative to create your
own loader, so why not use that one instead?e.g. i could have bothered to get [>~] into core pd for 7 long years. instead i chose the suggested way by writing an external that
provides [>~]. this has worked fine, why should i change it? why
should i have spent energy to get something i already have?
Ah, ok, I didn't realize that Miller has scaled back the loader stuff.
(why do i have to spend energy in explaining this?)
Maybe because you want people to use your code? :D
For example, it would be nice to be able to write <~ in tcl with
tclpd, if need be.yes indeed it would be nice. how do you think it should work (if done in core-pd)? why do you think it is impossible to do this with an external loader?
As a loader that worked for other loaders would be even better.
.hc
All information should be free. - the hacker ethic