On Nov 30, 2007, at 12:09 PM, Claude Heiland-Allen wrote: > Martin Peach wrote: >> Claude Heiland-Allen wrote: >>> Why doesn't [select 1 2 3 4] have 5 inlets and 5 outlets? >>> >>> Wouldn't break old patches, but could be useful in some >>> circumstances. >> >> Maybe it would make more sense if [select] accepted messages like >> [set 5 4 3 >> 2( on its single inlet and rejected lists. [select]'s current >> method for >> list handling is just pd's default behaviour when an object has no >> list >> method of its own. > > I disagree: multiple inlets allow different parts to be set > independently, and pd's default behaviour is common among many > objects, > which makes it easier to learn once.
From what I've seen, this shortcut that applies lists across inlets is directly responsible for the structures that cause a lot of the list/non-list confusion, and strange situations like this. It's entrenched, so I don't think it will be removed from or changed in pd- vanilla. But I was just thinking about it, I think it would make more sense if there was a standard selector to trigger this behavior, something like: [inlets 1 5( Then we could have [select] do the more natural thing and pass stuff out the right outlet unchanged. .hc ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- As we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. - Benjamin Franklin _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list