Frank Barknecht wrote: > Hallo, > Phil Stone hat gesagt: // Phil Stone wrote: > >> I thought of doing that, but reconsidered because it seems like it might >> lead to versioning problems, namespace clashes, multiple copies of >> objects and possibly, dogs and cats sleeping together. >> > > I've found an easier solution: add [declare -path .] to > polyWaveSynth.pd.
That requires > 40.0, right? Also, there doesn't seem to be a help patch for [declare] -- I've seen it mentioned here on the list, but is it documented anywhere? It looks like it would add [polyWaveSynth]s folder to PD's path -- but how would PD find [polyWaveSynth] to load it in the first place? Plus, does this really avoid any problems from including dependent objects (possibly creating multiple copies) inside abstraction folders? > Or was it PolyWaveSynth.pd? PolyWavesynth.pd? I > think all lowercase names are easier to remember <hint,hint>. ;) i'llconsiderthatforthenextrelease. :-) Phil _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list