On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 03:26:41AM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> As a human being, Miller has the right to reject patches. That doesn't
> mean that as a human being I have the duty to enjoy it.
>
> I genuinely believe that PureData is a fantastic piece of software in many
> ways (else I surel
What's the point of keeping this "running two instances" feature and make the check as default ?Why not take the opportunity to rework the scheduler (with threads) so we don't have to launch two instances ?
Sorry if I'm missing smth ... and please explain :)++On 9/13/06, Mathieu Bouchard <[EMAIL PR
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, padawan12 wrote:
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 22:39:16 -0400 (EDT)
Mathieu Bouchard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Agreed, but actually it would be good to have the choice as a comandline
arg of the first one launched with a way to accept patches to open in
the same instance from, say a w
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, David Plans Casal wrote:
On 13 Sep 2006, at 03:02, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
So for now, I guess we should simply be able to "open" pd's internal
developments to see some kind of Darwinism
Genetic evolution has more to do with monkeys on typewriters than about
people wanting
Yep... it's on my dolist :)
M
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 05:39:02PM +0100, padawan12 wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 22:39:16 -0400 (EDT)
> Mathieu Bouchard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Pd shouldn't check for another pd running. It is extremely common to use
> > two pd's at once. This is requi
On 13 Sep 2006, at 03:02, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
So for now, I guess we should simply be able to "open" pd's internal
developments to see some kind of Darwinism
Genetic evolution has more to do with monkeys on typewriters than
about people wanting to make intelligent decisions. (Darwin kne
Hi all,
i didn't follow all of the discussion, so only minimal words from my
side.
I'm all for it as long as it happens in a separate cvs branch. It's
already a lot of work to merge into devel_0_39 new changes by Miller
(the 0.40 changes have still to be merged in) and this will explode
on
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Chris McCormick wrote:
but they have to understand that as the leader of the project it is
completely Miller's right to reject patches that he doesn't want to see
as part of his vision of Pd.
As a human being, Miller has the right to reject patches. That doesn't
mean tha
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 22:39:16 -0400 (EDT)
Mathieu Bouchard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pd shouldn't check for another pd running. It is extremely common to use
> two pd's at once. This is required due to conflicts between audio and
> video. This is even something that we teach to newbies in wor
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 04:00:20AM +0200, Vincent Lordier wrote:
> So it's basically up to Miller to let the development process change,
> so we can propose improvements.
> If not, then I guess I'll join the growing group of discouraged ones,
> eventually.
I think you have hit the nail on the head
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
=> you want to focus on the "language and data structure" for the coming
year and that's your right (!)
=> Some want to focus on GUI and that's their right. It is independent from
data structures & language, since no matter what the objects do, drawin
>> > An explicit name saves the dev brain power at coding time ;)
>> I assert that often it doesn't. A name shouldn't be more explicit than it
>> needs to be,
> Quote from Wikipedia on software quality
> => http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Names
yes, according to that page, "Loca
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
Code quality standards try to define what is "good" code.
That's the problem: they ought to try to _discover_ what is "good" code.
So for now, I guess we should simply be able to "open" pd's internal
developments to see some kind of Darwinism
Gen
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
You didn't replace the fprintfs by posts. It should be posts because then
it can be routed through the GUI.
True.
Actually, they should be calls to error() or to pd_error(). The latter
should be used when there's an object associated with the error
I agree with this, from a non/novice programmer perspective. It would
make it a lot easier for me to learn the inner workings of Pd if it
were nicely labeled, and modularized.
It's so hard for me to just pick up and figure it all out! Even
taking computer science courses cannot prepare a person
Even considering the actual implementation instead of the simplifiedexample, I wouldn't consider that renaming p1 to priority_min is
really helping anyone, because they already know p1 is the minimumpriority by looking two lines above. All uses of p1 lie within 5 lines ofcode, so using a longer nam
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Miller Puckette wrote:
My top priority for Pd is to finish getting the 'language' defined. I
don't see this as an open-ended pursuit
If Pd isn't open-ended then it will have to be superceded...
another year or so of fooling with 'data structures' seems to be the
main re
>> I stopped caring about trying to organise PureData developers meetings>> some time ago. I think we've had seven of them. It didn't catch on.
> Communication is key.But communication can only be done among people who want to communicate.> IRC isn't the best tool but it's a start.What's "the" best
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
Let me take a quick example to illustrate my point :
(from s_inter.c, removed #ifdefs for this example)
void sys_set_priority(int higher)
{
struct sched_param par;
int p1 ,p2, p3;
p1 = sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_FIFO);
p2 = sched_get_priorit
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
do you do unit-testing?
Here's my point of view : to be able to do unit testing, we need functions
that are actually "testable", and that means they are :
- small
- not complex (small Cyclomatic number)
- doing one single thing
So do you want to fir
On 9/12/06, Miller Puckette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,Sorry not to jump in before now... Thanks for taking the time to answer then :)
My top priority for Pd is to finish getting the 'language' defined. Idon't see this as an open-ended pursuit; another year or so of foolingwith 'data struc
Hi all,
Sorry not to jump in before now... I'm in the middle of getting ready
for the school year here and don't have much time for longer-range
planning at the moment.
My top priority for Pd is to finish getting the 'language' defined. I
don't see this as an open-ended pursuit; another year or
Hi again ;)>> So, supposing you want to work with Miller
> Why no ?Because you want to refactor Pd and because, I suppose that you've readpd-list and/or pd-dev for some time.I did. And I've seen how this project works a little.The thing is, it doesn't work as a truly open community, but this can ch
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
So, supposing you want to work with Miller
Why no ?
Because you want to refactor Pd and because, I suppose that you've read
pd-list and/or pd-dev for some time.
To me, I shouldn't have to "work with Miller" or "work with Mathieu" or
anything lik
> 1. Does communication imply collaboration?
does collaboration work without communication?
> 2. Does collaboration imply everybody on the same branch?
a->b <=> ¬b->¬a
> > the diff between devel and vanilla are several thousand lines of code
> > ... and still increasing, mainly because of the
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Tim Blechmann wrote:
again, there are social problems ... the people contributing to the code
have different goals (data structures, fancy gui, gui/kernel separation,
performance, threading) ... however ... a roadmap would only make sense,
if these people would communicate
hi vincent ...
> That implies a primary work on architecture and a cooperation of all
> devs (commit often, criticize, propose, improve, test, submit
> patches, ...).
> I'll develop on architecture on other posts soon, but I want to first
> focus on making the best out of what we have today.
wel
So, supposing you want to work with MillerWhy no ?As long as the developments are not made "under closed doors" (= frequents commits / test releases / bug submits ), I'm willing to work with anyone.
To me, I shouldn't have to "work with Miller" or "work with Mathieu" or anything like this, simply
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Vincent Lordier wrote:
I want to work on pd's code readability and structure, only refactoring,
not adding new features. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refactoring)
Making diffs and applying diffs doesn't go too well with refactoring.
This leads to large diffs that clash e
On Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 02:21:33PM +0200, Vincent Lordier wrote:
> Hi enthusiasts devs !
>
> I want to work on pd's code readability and structure, only refactoring, not
> adding new features. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refactoring)
> The final goal is to make PD easy to scale (desactivate MIDI,
Vincent Lordier wrote:
> Why isn't the last 0.40-0test7 into CVS ? Are there other repositories, and
afaik, it is (probably it was checked in within the last 6 hours)
at least: `pd -version` shows "0.40-0test7" with a checkout i did just now.
> where are they, what are their goal and who maintai
I support this idea, but I have to say the biggest challenge will be social, not technical. I think in order for it to succeed, you will have to submit things in small, incremental patches. I think that it would be best to work on the MAIN branch in CVS, i.e. Miller's branch. But you should als
Hi enthusiasts devs !I want to work on pd's code readability and structure, only refactoring, not adding new features. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refactoring
)The final goal is to make PD easy to scale (desactivate MIDI, Audio, Network, some CoreLibs, ...)'We've got to undo the MIDI revolution!
33 matches
Mail list logo
