[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Sc-devel] deprecating UGens



I've no problem with those UGens being moved out to (say) sc3-plugins,
that should work fine. Quarks can't currently handle UGens but the
sc3-plugins infrastructure is all there. Does that sound OK?

Dan

2007/11/17, ronald kuivila <rkuivila@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi all,
>
> When it comes to UGens, we might have a policy of adding them to a
> "historic ugens" quark of some sort.
> Sometimes idiosyncrasies of a UGen matter, so it cannot really be
> superseded, even if it falls out of common use.
>
> RJK
>
> On Nov 17, 2007, at 5:59 AM, Scott Wilson wrote:
>
> >
> > On 16 Nov 2007, at 23:35, Click Nilson wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I wanted to outline my proposed changes to instantiate in the
> >> coming weeks, for comments and approval. These are being
> >> considered alongside the writing of my scbook chapter on this topic.
> >>
> >> 1. Potential removal of PV_HainsworthFoote and PV_JensenAndersen
> >> as outdated and not worth supporting (there are much better
> >> solutions now).
> >>
> > Well, I've used JA quite a lot. Why not deprecate first?
> >
> > S.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sc-devel mailing list
> > Sc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://www.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-devel
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sc-devel mailing list
> Sc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-devel
>


-- 
http://www.mcld.co.uk