On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Miller Puckette wrote:
But to return to the original question, if my 'improvement' of
pack destroys the nice symmetry of pack and unpack arguments, this
certainly calls the design of unlack into question, since the only
reason its arguments are as they are is that they were designed so
in the context of a no-longer-extant pack.
Is symmetry so important?
Why is it that leftmost inlet is special, not only in terms of
implementation (the object _is_ its own left inlet except in case of
NOINLET) but also that it is the 'active' inlet for most classes?
Because there's no special built-in outlet in those same objects...
Why are some classes using the reverse order? [timer], [realtime],
[cputime]. For those objects, messages need to be sent left-to-right; the
rightmost inlet triggers output.
What about [unselect] and [unroute] ?
Why can't [send~] and [receive~] be used just like [send] and [receive]
and instead of making it many-to-many you added [catch~] and [throw~] that
instead has exactly the opposite problem?
Where's [tabwrite4] ? ;)
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal QC Canada
_______________________________________________
PD-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
