Maybe there's a trick someone can suggest, but I didn't think that was possible. There's a timbreID.c source file for the [timbreID] object in the library, and a timbreIDLib.c source file for building the whole library as a single binary. That calls the _setup() functions for all the individual objects and also has a timbreIDLib_setup function itself. So making the names the same would result in two timbreID_setup() calls that are supposed to do two different things. I never looked into ways to work around that...
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 4:42 PM Alexandre Torres Porres <por...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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 > -- William Brent www.williambrent.com “Great minds flock together” Conflations: conversational idiom for the 21st century www.conflations.com
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list