On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 at 07:53, Miller Puckette <[email protected]> wrote: > Both Shahrokh (who wrote expr, and whose office is 15 feet from mine) and > I keep thinking about how to extend expr to add more control flow, which > should include looping, conditionals, perhaps some sort of block structure, > etc. The problem we always hit is that there's no way to figure out where > to > stop. And if you keep on not stopping, you end up inventing a programming > language. There seems to be no "correct" way to do it. >
It seems though the proposed [if] object would be like a slight modification on the existing "if" operator. Instead of having "if" as an operator, I guess the proposal is to turn it into an object, because an expression has to always output a value (?), but if we are implementing "if", "else", "then" operators, an outlet does not have to necessarily output anything, which I guess is the main difference between the existing "if" operator and the proposed [if] object. In my ill-informed opinion, I think this is quite a big step away from inventing a programming language, but again, I am quite new to this community, so pardon me if this is not making sense. > > cheers > Miller > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev >
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
