>________________________________ > From: Ivica Bukvic <i...@vt.edu> >To: Jonathan Wilkes <jancs...@yahoo.com> >Cc: pd-list <pd-list@iem.at> >Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 1:41 PM >Subject: Re: [PD] bang vs empty list > > > >On Mar 1, 2013 12:14 PM, "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancs...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >________________________________ >> > From: Ivica Bukvic <i...@vt.edu> >> >To: Jonathan Wilkes <jancs...@yahoo.com> >> >Cc: pd-list <pd-list@iem.at> >> >Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 12:03 PM >> >Subject: Re: [PD] bang vs empty list >> > >> > >> >This makes perfect sense. However, I have at least a couple of patches >> >where I have a select connected to a networked stream of messages one which >> >includes bang. So after I have to appied IOhannes' patch, this effectively >> >resulted in a regression where bang messages were not recognized by the >> >select object, throwing a large number of errors. >> >> I don't understand. When did you change [select] to accept bang messages? >> Or are you saying >> that you were receiving the message "list" and it went unreported? >Yes they were being registered as list that before IOhannes' patch and now are >being reported as errors. so I opted for the select patch I proposed above. >> >> >> > While one can argue that this is simply a poorly designed patch the other >> > side of the coin is to say that this latest addition has caused a breakage >> > in the existing patches as this problem was never reported by pd before >> > and now is causing xruns. I also hear your call for consistency so I am >> > open for going either way particularly because the example you gave did >> > not use select. After all what follows from select is nothing more than a >> > bang while symbol bang would be intercepted anyways. >> >> There are probably very few cases where one would actually need to >> differentiate between "bang" and "symbol bang" using [select], but it seems >> like bad design to let two distinct messages trigger the same >> behavior in an object whose sole purpose is to differentiate messages from >> each other. >At the same time I think having to cover bang to symbol bang just to have it >selectable by select does not seem very intuitive to me. How would you even do >that in the first place if there's more than just a bang coming into that >inlet, e.g. a bang and float values? You couldn't use [symbol] before it as >that would trash float values. Outputting the message from [textfile] (which has its own problems because it outputs anything instead of list), then something like [list-drip]. Splitting the message up in the list domain ensures that you won't lose data since everything is treated as a list. So if there is the word "bang" somewhere in the middle of the message it will come out of [list-drip] (or a home-brewed one using [list split]) as "list bang" which gets interpreted by [select] as a symbol message. That's the only way to parse a text file in Pd without running into errors (although you'll still lose data, for example, if consecutive whitespaces are needed, or special characters that Pd escapes, etc.).
-Jonathan _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
