On Jun 23, 2008, at 2:58 PM, Roman Haefeli wrote: > On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 14:35 +0200, Steffen Juul wrote: >> On Mon, June 23, 2008 2:17 pm, Roman Haefeli wrote: >> >>> the only good reason to keep [tabread4~] in pd is to keep backwards >>> compatibility with patches that exploit [tabread4~]'s wierd >>> behaviour, >>> imo. >> >> Witch is a good enough reason to keep it, imho. > > i wasn't proposing to deprecate it, but i was only saying, it is the > _only_ reason to keep it i can think of.
"tabread4~" isn't such a great name that it should be used for the new one. Why not use a more descriptive name for the new one? Also, changing the code of tabread4~ will change the sound quality of a piece. I think it is very important to keep the same sound quality since many people have spent a lot of time building patches around tabread4~ and like the way those patches sound. .hc ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- All mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated.... -John Donne _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list