I updated my file. It seems the only "tricky" message is 'coords', right?
I put a warning about it. So, does it settle it? Em sáb., 27 de nov. de 2021 às 22:01, Christof Ressi <i...@christofressi.com> escreveu: > I very much agree with your points. > > If we lump "user space" and "internal" messaging together in an open > manual, then they should be clearly delineated with special placed on > emphasizing what things are more or less stable and what things are not. > Then the user can decide how they want to proceed. > > As you say, it's better to document all of it and at the same time make it > clear what is public and what is private. And figure out how to deal with > the large gray area in between :-) > > Christof > On 28.11.2021 00:37, Dan Wilcox wrote: > > Howdy all, > > My feeling on this is: > > 1. Recognize that, despite using "private" or "unstable" internal APIs, > people have been using/abusing them for years. (So far, I feel we have been > recognizing this by being careful not to break things, more or less.) > > 2. We should document all internal messaging, at least for the sake of > developer documentation. If we lump "user space" and "internal" messaging > together in an open manual, then they should be clearly delineated with > special placed on emphasizing what things are more or less stable and what > things are not. Then the user can decide how they want to proceed. I don't > see a problem if people want to play with the internals on their own > machine and crash Pd... that's half the fun for such activities anyway > (learning). > > 3. We should get a poll of which internal messages are currently in use > and consider which of these could be moved into "user space" and/or > replaced by a better API. I believe this thread is already providing a good > list... > > 4. Open a technical discussion on supporting "dynamic patching" > officially. It's clearly very useful even if clunky through the current > workarounds. Even with [clone] there are still many use cases... > > On Nov 28, 2021, at 12:25 AM, pd-list-requ...@lists.iem.at wrote: > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 20:20:49 +0100 > From: Jean-Yves Gratius <j...@gumo.fr> > To: pd-list@lists.iem.at > Subject: Re: [PD] documenting messages to/from Pd and dynamic patching > Message-ID: <f41bab20-e831-3f04-52fb-ba273b1e0...@gumo.fr> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed" > > On 27/11/2021 17:19, pd-list-requ...@lists.iem.at wrote: > > ForwardedMessage.eml > > Subject: > Re: [PD] documenting messages to/from Pd and dynamic patching > From: > Christof Ressi <i...@christofressi.com> > Date: > 27/11/2021 ? 17:01 > > To: > Pd-List <pd-list@lists.iem.at> > > > Two examples that come to my mind: > > 1) [iemguts/canvasselect] allows to (de)select objects simply by > index. No need to emulate mouse selection with "mouse" and "mouseup". > > 2) canvases/objects can be moved around with [iemguts/canvasposition] > resp. [iemguts/canvasobjectposition] > > Are there any other use cases for "mouse" and "mouseup"? > > Hi. My 2 cents > > Personally, I use mouse and mouseup messages to forward multitouch > events into the patch, received? from my multitouch linux laptop. > > If those messages were blocked, all my multitouch ecosystem would be out > of order :-) . > > > -------- > Dan Wilcox > @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> > danomatika.com > robotcowboy.com > > > > > _______________________________________________pd-l...@lists.iem.at mailing > list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >
Pd-messages.pd
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list