Steffen wrote: >>> I guess a list of object and there relation can be fetched by parsing >>> the code in CVS. The metadata could provide some description but not per >>> object except for the cases where an external only have one object (or >> >> this i don't understand. > > I thought that the description was per object, hence not per group of > externals. Fx. the metadata for zexy says "swiss army knife for pd". I > can't just find one, but there could well be a group of externals with > only one object, in which case the description of the group of externals > would be the same as the for the that one object. So i most cases manual > editing of descriptions would be needed especially if the description is > to be per object.
hmm, i think i understand. the pdb should hold both accurate descriptions of objects and generic descriptions of libraries (if there is a library at all) appearently "swiss army kife for pd" doesn't tell you anything about [z~], which is probably what you are looking for. > >> apart from that: >> personally i am not convinced that the database should be created on the >> fly from CVS for various reasons: >> - code would have to follow a certain outline in order to make this work > > Ok. I thought that such outline was already established by m_pd.h or > "the way" to write externals. no, this won't help you. there is no point in documenting that the object understands "open <symbol>" messages, if you don't know what the object does. i always thought that pdb is not a help-patch replacement but a place to find an object that does certain things (like: being written by somebody ;-)) > >> - separation between code and documentation is rather low (coders >> usually hate to documentate their stuff; so a host of volunteers is >> needed to do the documentation; they don't necessarily need to interfere >> with the source-code for this task) >> - accuracy tends to be low with automated systems >> >> >> so i think that the database ought to be manually maintained. > > Ok. I was just suggesting what i thought would be the easiest way to > keep the database accuracy high, since, as you say, coders don't > necessarily do the docs - or just might not see the use for a database. > That's all. i think we don't disagree here. i think most things i said are implicit in your original email. (i said: "use CVS to initially populate the db, but the real work is in maintaining the db manually") mftgad IOhannes _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list