Many thanks to you all, [initbang] seems just what I was looking for. As for individual, dynamic firing with [loadbang], the problem with
[loadbang( | [send pd-foo.pd] is that I have several foo abstractions and I would like to fire them individually. So, by now [initbang] seems the way to go. Josep M > From: reduz...@gmail.com > To: pd-list@iem.at > Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 12:25:35 +0100 > Subject: Re: [PD] some issues with dynamic patching > > On Sam, 2013-03-23 at 15:39 +0200, Alexandros Drymonitis wrote: > > Concerning [loadbang] you should use [initbang] instead AFAIK. But > > that's not vanilla. > > There are two separate issues to be considered: > > [initbang] should be used when you dynamically create xlets within an > abstraction, so that those are created before the connections of the > parent are drawn. > > I think what OP means is that [loadbang]s in dynamically created > abstractions do not fire too late, but not at all. Whether this is a > feature or a bug is not clear to me, but it is the current behavior > which has been discussed many times on this list. To me this behavior > actually makes sense. It allows you to first create many instances of > the abstraction dynamically and only then let them loadbang by sending a > 'loadbang' message to their canvasses. > > Roman > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
