On Jan 26, 2008, at 4:17 PM, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 12:44 -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>> Using [t a b b] vs. [trigger anything bang bang] encourages
>> people to cram lots of stuff into a patch, and to cross cords, when
>> they should be laying things out cleanly and grouping logical chunks
>> into subpatches.
>
> i cannot follow you here. how does [t a b b] encourage people to do
> what
> you are claiming it does? how does [trigger anything bang bang]
> lead to
> more cleanly layed-out patches?
> i am a 'hard' [t b b a] user and i don't think, that makes me create
> ugly, badly layed-out patches.
I'll have to think about a good example of this, I don't have one off
hand. The key part of understanding a patch is understanding the
flow and the various sections. Having the trigger spread out when
using full words makes it more likely to have the flow cleanly laid
out, IMHO. But this is a much lesser problem that the inconsistent
definitions of "s", "b", "a", "f", etc.
Even better would be a trigger like jMax's, that just passes the data
thru with the right order, and can be an arbitrary size.
.hc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
kill your television
_______________________________________________
PD-dev mailing list
PD-dev@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
