Le 2012-01-22 à 13:30:00, i go bananas a écrit :
what's the deal with dynamic patching these days? it was always just a 'use at your own risk' type of affair, which was never guaranteed to work. Has it graduated to being a legitimate practice?
Much of Pd is « Use at your own risk ». The fact is that way too few things in Pd are labelled as part of the official interface (API), and many of the things that are labelled as « WARNING, MAY CHANGE OVERNIGHT » already have coagulated into something that people rely on and need to stay the same.
So it's not a matter of time, it's just a matter of who you ask.But even notwithstanding the risk of changing API, it's still a good idea to encapsulate dynamic patching into easy-to-understand units, instead of blending it with everything else. That's why [initbang] can be important, for example, and that's one reason why it's a bad idea to use pd-vanilla.
______________________________________________________________________ | Mathieu BOUCHARD ----- téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 ----- Montréal, QC
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
