hello,
i'm sorry to jump again on this kind of topic, but it's painful to read a mail like that.
Le 26/06/2016 23:31, Alexandre Torres Porres a écrit :
2016-06-26 16:35 GMT-03:00 IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoelnig@iem.at mailto:zmoelnig@iem.at>:
for me this sounds a bit like "i'd love to see them as externals
totally sound like that :)
*so* they can be included in some library"
yeah, also like the idea of having it not as a single separate thing
abstraction vs external did not change anything regarding this matter. anyhow, you can create a "useful_abstraction_from_the_mailing_list" folder on your computer and it will soon be full of patch. (no more separate thing)
would you care to explain what makes externals superior?
I don't think I'm the best one to discuss about the external x abstraction in terms of 'superiority', but yeah, I do like them better, I think they can be designed and work in ways that abstractions just don't (specially GUIs),
and it's a common sense they are more efficient.
common sense is sometime wrong.
anyhow, performance is not really a problem because :
i think abstraction are preferable when possible because :
An other example is when distributing a patch on a CD/SD, it became obsolete as soon as osX get a new version.
In any way, I guess this discuss will touch known facts and issues and be subject to personal preferences.
Personal preference can be irrational, but they can also evolve.
OK,sometimes, externals can be faster. And in sometimes, it matter. Also, sometimes, externals can be more flexible. (initbang problem)
But it look like this abstraction did not fall in this 2 categories. Do you think of a fact that would lead to reprogram it to an external?
cheers c
cheers
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list