I say it's a workaround, hehe, I'm used to dealing with this in many ways,
but it gets a little painful doing them every time. Things would be much
easier if it'd just work.

cheers

Em ter, 4 de set de 2018 às 04:55, Dan Wilcox <[email protected]>
escreveu:

> I'd say this is a "paper cut." It's a small issue easily worked around by
> the addition of an extra step, but that extra step is painful due to it's
> repetition. Also, I've seen it be a confusing step for many beginners once
> they learn to use $0 in objects, ie [f $0], [symbol $0], etc.
>
> I'm on the side of $0 in message boxes. I don't see how this change would
> break anything since $0 currently resolves to 0 (I think), and I cannot
> imagine anyone relying on this. Is it a controversy?
>
> On Sep 4, 2018, at 9:41 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
> Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 21:02:39 -0700
> From: Miller Puckette <[email protected]>
> To: Alexandre Torres Porres <[email protected]>
> Cc: Henri Augusto Bisognini <[email protected]>, pd-dev
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [PD-dev] roadmap for Pd-0.49?
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> This one is mired in controversy.  Meanwhile, you can get "$0"
> functionality
> in a message box by preceeding it with "list prepend $0" so that $1 in the
> message box is teh patch's $0 and the other $ arguments are renumbered by
> one.
>
> cheers
> Miller
>
>
> --------
> Dan Wilcox
> @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika>
> danomatika.com
> robotcowboy.com
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev

Reply via email to