On Dec 1, 2007, at 9:17 PM, Chris McCormick wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 02:06:52PM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner > wrote: >>> Which has bitten me on the ass at least once when making music with >>> someone who uses pd-extended. Hans, I wonder if you could make it >>> clear >>> to people who download pd-extended that it is incompatible with >>> Pd, an >>> older version, and that it is bundled with many externals which >>> aren't >>> in Pd by default? >>> >>> Note that I really appreciate all the work you are doing to make >>> people's >>> lives easier, and don't want to put a dent in your efforts. I just >>> think >>> if we're not careful with breaking compatability people are going >>> to get >>> very confused very quickly. >> >> Correct me if I am wrong, but using Pd-extended vs Pd-vanilla of the >> same version is no more incompatible than using Pd-vanilla 0.40 vs. >> 0.39. If you use [declare] in a patch in pd-vanilla 0.40, then it >> won't work in pd-vanilla 0.39. If you use [atan2] in Pd-vanilla 0.37 >> then it won't be compatible with pd-vanilla 0.38, and vice-versa. > > If you change the behaviour of something as fundemental as [select] > in pd-extended and it doesn't get changed in Pd, then the patches and > libraries I write under Pd won't work properly in pd-extended.
That is well understood. I have no plans to change [select] in an incompatible way. Frank clearly illustrated why the change discussed would break things. .hc > > You are correct though, if I recall correctly the specific problem I > had with someone using pd-extended was when I tried to show them > something that only works in 0.40. I had to get them to download the > latest in order to get my abstraction to work. Which is fine - I guess > you can't be expected to track the latest Pd exactly. > >> Pd-extended 0.39 is basically like half way between pd-vanilla 0.39 >> and 0.40 since it includes patches that get included in 0.40, but >> doesn't include miller's 0.40 changes. > > Got it. > >> This is the reason why I made the [hcs/version] object, you can issue >> a warning if someone is using your patch with a version not tested or >> known to be incompatible. It's not in Pd-vanilla, I never submitted >> it to the patch tracker since I wasn't sure of the best interface for >> it, like maybe it should be a message like [;pd version(, then you >> listen on [receive pd]-[route version] for the response. > > Might be a good idea if it acheives widespread use. > > Best, > > Chris. > > ------------------- > http://mccormick.cx ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- Access to computers should be unlimited and total. - the hacker ethic _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
