On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
I don't understand what you're saying about receive symbols. How do you get
the single characters in the first place?
Oh, nevermind. Just a silly mistake of mine.
Anyway... I think that all this kind of thing will do, is scare off any
potential pd users that like clean designs... I mean, such patches are
quite skilled, but wouldn't it be nice if such skills could concentrate
more on things that aren't Turing Tarpit Voodoo Dance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_tarpit
It does scare me that my [list-drip] is more used than my [foreach]. Both
do the same thing, but [list-drip] is more twisted, much slower than
[foreach], and I originally designed it to show how ridiculous things can
get when trying to be efficient while sticking to what plain vanilla 42
has to offer. The answer is that what is considered the standard class
library (used by everybody) has to grow faster than what someone is
willing to do. Few people have the luxury of holding back additions to
core software while pondering a few years on how to name them.
I consider my [list-drip] to be a small improvement over the older
[list-drip]. The big improvement is when people will stop insisting on
using an abstraction for doing something that ought to be written in C.
_______________________________________________________________________
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
