yo....
this might sound silly (and you guys most likely don't care, what version _i_ have installed). however, the 'menu -> help -> About Pd' tells me:
Pd version 0.40.3
when i load [version] from hcs, it gives me:
0 41 0 test06 Dec 7 2007 03:24:18
when i load hexloader, which i just compiled, i get:
hex loader $Revision: 1.5 $ written by IOhannes m zmï¿œnig, IEM zmoelnig@iem.at compiled on Mar 11 2008 at 11:03:15 compiled against Pd version 0.40.3.
aaah, and now i realized, that there is simply 'pd -version', which also gives me:
Pd version 0.40-3 compiled 06:47:02 Nov 28 2007
yo.. seems like [version] is buggy, if 'pd -version' can be trusted.
roman
___________________________________________________________ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de
Roman Haefeli wrote:
yo....
this might sound silly (and you guys most likely don't care, what version _i_ have installed). however, the 'menu -> help -> About Pd' tells me:
Pd version 0.40.3
for magical reasons this is usually correct.
when i load [version] from hcs, it gives me:
0 41 0 test06 Dec 7 2007 03:24:18
version is actually broken in the implementation, as it reports the version of Pd the object was _compiled_ against, not the one it is running in.
this is done because it is easy to find out the version of pd at compile time, but not so easy at runtime.
the likely argument is, that you should run pd-extended and use the version in there, which will (hopefully) be compiled against the same version as it is running in.
when i load hexloader, which i just compiled, i get:
hex loader $Revision: 1.5 $ written by IOhannes m zm�nig, IEM zmoelnig@iem.at compiled on Mar 11 2008 at 11:03:15 compiled against Pd version 0.40.3.
again, this version-number tells you only the version of Pd the hexloader was compiled against. it has nothing to do with the version of Pd you are actually running.
aaah, and now i realized, that there is simply 'pd -version', which also gives me:
Pd version 0.40-3 compiled 06:47:02 Nov 28 2007
this is the one that can be trusted most.
fmgas.dr IOhannes
On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 11:27 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
hex loader $Revision: 1.5 $ written by IOhannes m zmï¿œnig, IEM zmoelnig@iem.at compiled on Mar 11 2008 at 11:03:15 compiled against Pd version 0.40.3.
again, this version-number tells you only the version of Pd the hexloader was compiled against. it has nothing to do with the version of Pd you are actually running.
but then, something seems to be unkosher with [hexloader]. i definitely had 0.41 in my pd sources, while i compiled hexloader, while pd 0.40.3 was installed. shouldn't [hexloader] print
compiled against Pd version 0.41.1.
then?
roman
___________________________________________________________ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de
Roman Haefeli wrote:
but then, something seems to be unkosher with [hexloader]. i definitely had 0.41 in my pd sources, while i compiled hexloader, while pd 0.40.3 was installed. shouldn't [hexloader] print
compiled against Pd version 0.41.1.
it will do so. the mechanism is rather straightforward (it's the same as [version] uses): include m_pd.h where PD_MAJOR_VERSION, PD_MINOR_VERSION (et al.) are defined and use these defines for the version-string.
probably you only thought that you compiled hexloader against 0.41.1, while in reality it was including the m_pd.h it found (e.g.) in /usr/local/include.
fgmasdr IOhannes
On Mar 11, 2008, at 6:27 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Roman Haefeli wrote:
yo....
this might sound silly (and you guys most likely don't care, what version _i_ have installed). however, the 'menu -> help -> About Pd' tells me:
Pd version 0.40.3
for magical reasons this is usually correct.
when i load [version] from hcs, it gives me:
0 41 0 test06 Dec 7 2007 03:24:18
version is actually broken in the implementation, as it reports the version of Pd the object was _compiled_ against, not the one it is running in.
this is done because it is easy to find out the version of pd at
compile time, but not so easy at runtime.the likely argument is, that you should run pd-extended and use the version in there, which will (hopefully) be compiled against the same version as it is running in.
[version] is a quick hack. Ideally it would get the version of the
running Pd. I suppose there could be a function in Pd that returned
the version. Patches welcome :)
.hc
when i load hexloader, which i just compiled, i get:
hex loader $Revision: 1.5 $ written by IOhannes m zm�nig, IEM zmoelnig@iem.at compiled on Mar 11 2008 at 11:03:15 compiled against Pd version 0.40.3.
again, this version-number tells you only the version of Pd the hexloader was compiled against. it has nothing to do with the
version of Pd you are actually running.aaah, and now i realized, that there is simply 'pd -version',
which also gives me:Pd version 0.40-3 compiled 06:47:02 Nov 28 2007
this is the one that can be trusted most.
fmgas.dr IOhannes
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list
¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!
-
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Roman Haefeli