--- On Mon, 2/21/11, Frank Barknecht <f...@footils.org> wrote:
> From: Frank Barknecht <f...@footils.org> > Subject: Re: [PD] loadbang not sent for dynamically created objects? > To: pd-list@iem.at > Date: Monday, February 21, 2011, 9:50 AM > On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 07:49:09PM > +0000, Pedro Lopes wrote: > > >yes, this is known. > > By known you mean.. Is it on the bug tracker already? > > As Cyrille wrote, it's not a bug, but a feature: Usually > when you use an > abstraction in your patch and you load that patch, > everything inside of that > abstraction is loaded first, including its loadbangs, then > the surrounding > patch goes through its own loadbangs. Normally you don't > recognize this, but > the order becomes important, when the abstraction sends > something to the > surrounding patch for example through its outlet. Then the > rule is: First the > abstractions sends through the outlet, possibly influencing > stuff in the main > patch, then the main patch loadbangs. See the attachement > "main.pd" for an > illustration of this behaviour. > > Now dynamic patching basically is the same as loading a > patch: The messages are > almost the same, only now they get sent to a [pd something] > subpatch-receiver > instead of to Pd's internal objectmaker. You can see this > in the second > example, main-dynamic.pd, whic just patches the contents of > main.pd into a > subpatch. > > The important difference is the handling of loadbangs: If > an abstraction like > [lb-abs] would execute its loadbang immediatly, then it > would bang to an > outlet, that is not yet connected! So in the end your > result would be > different from the result you get when loading main.pd, > although it's the same > construction. > > To overcome this ambiguity, loadbanging in dynamic patching > is an explicit > action: You have to initiate the loadbangs at an > appropriate time that you > decide on your own. Ususally it's fine to do that by > sending a "loadbang" > message at the end of your dynamic patching cycle, to the > same receiver. This > way also the execution order of the construct you've build > will be preserved in > execution of the loadbangs and initialisation. > > > When such things are discovered (and by things I mean > issues), shouldn't > > they be documented inside the help patches? > > There are no official help patches for dynamic patching, > only the tutorial > floating around somewhere, which I can't find ATM. The > loadbang explanation > should probably be inside of this, if it isn't already. I think I need to add the term "official" to the (probably unofficial*) Pd glossary. What does it mean? I.e., what information are you trying to convey by using it? -Jonathan * It uses dynamic patching + an external > > Ciao > -- > Frank Barknecht > Do You RjDj.me? _ > ______footils.org__ > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@iem.at > mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
