Ugh.
Dear list members,
Do you see a problem with the development process that is implied in this
thread? If so, PM me and describe (but please do not rationalize) what you
think the problem is.
I can't say it will help improve anything about this (non-)development process,
but it will help me retain my sanity. :)
Thanks,
Jonathan
On Thursday, October 9, 2014 3:06 AM, Frank Barknecht <f...@footils.org> wrote:
Hi,
indeed: the code in question has been implemented several times in various
external libraries, so adding it to the main binary of a pd-fork would just
create
an unnecessary incompatibility to vanilla core objects, but not gain anything
at all.
Ciao
--
Frank
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 02:44:54PM -0400, Dan Wilcox wrote:
> Sure, but we're referring to pd-vanilla.
>
> On Oct 2, 2014, at 6:00 AM, pd-list-requ...@lists.iem.at wrote:
>
> >
> > If that's all [list foreach] is supposed to do I'll go ahead and implement
> > this in Pd-l2ork [...]
> >
> > -Jonathan
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
