On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 18:44 -0300, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote: > > I do agree on this point about their convenience and everything. I > pointed I do offer abstractions for that matter. Though I do maintain > the personal and humble opinion that I'd rather see a multislider > external in this case. Mostly because I don't feel like installing 10 > external libraries just so I can check it.
Valid point. I guess nobody is seeing an advantage in having an abstraction depending on many externals over an external not depending on anything. The general "pro-abstraction" notion does probably focus more on vanilla-only abstractions (or abstractions as part of a library): They _are_ more portable as they do not need to be compiled for several platforms, they _are_ more educative for Pd users (especially those that call themselves 'not programmers, but musicians'), since they can be more easily inspected than externals. Those are facts and not a matter of preference. > > I guess I wasn't clear when I said I'd love to see it as an external > and included in some library - maybe I should have spent more time > writing more than just a couple of lines. But my point was only that > it'd be quite easier if it were the case where we could just see it > just as an external included in some of the libraries you used - like > cyclone... I agree with you about the ease of libraries but still have the impression you think something can only be a library when it is compiled code, or am I wrong? I don't know where this notion comes from, but it is simply not true. I don't know if you have noticed, but zexy is a mixed library consisting of abstractions and externals (why should everything in it be externals?). list-abs is a library consisting only of abstractions. I don't see any reason why something couldn't be added to a library as abstraction. In the case of ph_msl the elimination of a lot of dependencies would be a valid reason for rewriting it as an external. > Now that I hopefully made myself clear, I wonder and ask; does > anyeone disagree with that? Does anybody think it's a better thing > that cyclone doesn't have a multislider object included right there > and that maybe it's just better to have an abstraction that relies on > the cyclone library and many more? No, I believe most agree with you, at least I do. The discussion arose because you sounded like compiled externals should be _generally_ preferred which I still disagree with. In the end your own argument is "but as an external it would require less externals" - we're on the same track on this :-) Roman
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list