One way perhaps of standardising the external situation would be an install menu item in pd. This would allow a the selection of a definition file:

external=ext example lib_win=ext.dll lib_linux=ext_linux depends=zexy doc=ext_help.pd author=Bob the Builder version=0.1 data=12/12/1947

or something similar. Pd would then copy the correct files to the correct places (and do things like saying - "you already have a more recent version installed - continue - yes/no").

mark

-----Original Message----- From: drjschn@gmx.de [mailto:drjschn@gmx.de] Sent: 11 April 2002 14:37 To: pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Subject: Wishlist (was Re: [PD] 3 questions regarding PD)

On 9 Apr, Ivica Bukvic wrote:

Actually my time is short for the next few moths so i can not join coding soon. But being inspired by Ico i had some thoughts to share.

1. Will there [ever] be the patch implemented that will allow "elbows"

[...]

Nice idea. I immediately had to think of *optional components* or alternative specifications. If the nice 3d gui slider is missing we might use the standard one. If we have a faster fft... Anyway, a decoupling granularity less than a subpatch might cause confusion. Such a feature could be implemented using pd itself but a standard mechanism would help a lot. I would call it a configuration manager. Proper design might even allow to substitute hardware by a software emulation. (1)

Working with pd i could easily increase my effectivity if i had a *macro toolbox* (some sticky "insert from file" dialog). I'd love to have a placement grid snap or some *alignment*. (Yes this is my failure but i seem to be addicted to optical purity) *Zoom buttons* also would be great.

3. What are the chances of incorporating all externals and stuff (i.e.

Framestein, Gem etc.) together with Pd into one simple installer, rather than having to look for all of them all over the net?

Since a lot of modules exist and many of them implement functionality of common interest i also had an itch calling for compilations. The idea is good but how to support "open" in "open source"?

The modules interdepend somehow. Compilations should not become necessary as a whole to use a particular module. If one provides a dependency checking automagic download and install tool it should have a finer granularity than compilations. (BTW "compilations" - lets brainstorm: gui, audio, video, math, scripting, control and connection, development)

We need:

• a download list. pure-data.org could host (it does already somehow)
• check dependencies. tool and component interface
• compile and install (tool and interface)
• documentation is most important since standards will only be used if documented properly.

Maybe extend the current directory structure.

Have i overlooked a wishlist on any pd related website?

Greetings

• Robert Figura

Footnote:

(1): For more notions see "Generative Programming", by Czarnecki, Eisenhecker, 2000.