Em qui, 1 de ago de 2019 às 13:27, William Brent <william.br...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Hi Alex, thanks for taking a look. Yes - the reason I ended up calling the > single library binary timbreIDLib is that there was already a [timbreID] > object in the library. I just wanted to avoid confusion. Looking back, I > wish I had named that object something else. At this point I think I'd > rather live with an awkwardly named library rather than change the name of > any individual object within it, but I'm open to suggestions. > My suggestion was to change the name of library, not the object. But I don't really understand the challenges involved (haven't really checked the code structure). Though I think it's feasible. What do you say? Have you considered it and thought it wasn't possible or worth it? cheers
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
