I'd probably got for adding arguments to the Vanilla version of [wrap], even 
though it's quite simple arithmetic to work it up there's no reason not to 
change that. Particularly if it keeps it's current settings as defaults. 

> Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 22:29:48 +0100
> From: zmoel...@iem.at
> To: pd-list@iem.at
> Subject: Re: [PD] A present
> 
> Quoting "cyrille henry" <c...@chnry.net>:
> 
> >
> >
> > zmoel...@iem.at a écrit :
> > ...
> >> should be fairly simple to write an abstraction that wraps  
> >> vanilla's [wrap] into the zexy version.
> >
> >
> > wrap is problematic, because if you use the zexy version, and then  
> > use your patch on an other computer without zexy : you will not have  
> > any warning and your patch may not work.
> 
> 
> i know,l but i cannot do anything short of rolling back the time.
> 
> >
> > usually, you have an error because of missing object...
> >
> 
> i would suggest that the vanilla [wrap] should refuse to create (or at  
> least throw a serious warning) when it is invoked with arguments.
> 
> or even better: the vanilla wrap would just clone the behaviour of  
> zexy's wrap.
> while the code for it is right now GPL, i would consider  
> dual-licensing it under BSD in order to get it into vanilla :-)
> 
> fgamsdr
> IOhannes
> 
> 
> fgmar
> IOhannes
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
                                          
_________________________________________________________________
Use Hotmail to send and receive mail from your different email accounts
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394592/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Reply via email to