I was thinking that it could be done through the main inlet using a "set" message, just like the tabread and tabwrite objects. But a second inlet might be good also. What could go wrong?
________________________________ From: Alexandre Torres Porres <por...@gmail.com> Sent: 29 October 2017 05:19 To: Liam Goodacre Cc: PD list Subject: Re: [PD] A "set" method for [value] I always find additions to vanilla useful :) maybe a design like [send], if it has no argument, then you have a 2nd inlet where you can set it I suspect the problem sometimes is not being hard or easy to implement, but getting the design right and sure you're doing a nice thing. cheers 2017-10-29 2:35 GMT-02:00 Liam Goodacre <liamg...@hotmail.com<mailto:liamg...@hotmail.com>>: You know what would be a really useful feature? A "set" method for [value], so that you can redefine which [value] you're tuned into, like the right inlet on the [array] objects. Would other people use this? It seems to me that it would be easily implementable and would have no effect on backwards compatibility. Liam _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at<mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at> mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
