Jack wrote:
> What do you think ?
s
this is basically what frank has been suggesting and what matju and me
have kind-of supported.
it would have been good if it was like that in the first place.
the rest frank, matju and me have written about it is, that it would be
a bad idea to add this to Pd as
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Chris McCormick wrote:
the winter sunshine,
cold hands connecting boxes;
Pd crashed again.
[bang(/[until],
#N canvas 599 200 450 300 10;
#X obj 30 49 t a;
#X obj 0 0 loadbang;
#X obj 0 19 t a a;
#X connect 0 0 2 0;
#X connect 1 0 2 0;
#X connect 2 0 0 0;
#X connect 2 1 0 0
> From: Frank Barknecht
>
> [1] Actually the $-variables 1,2,3,... in message boxes and those in
> object boxes aren't that different, because the contents of object
> boxes also are messages to Pd's objectmaker and they are used
> explicitely as messages when doing dynamic patching.
>
Yes, this
Frank Barknecht wrote:
> Hallo,
> Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>
>
>> On Sat, 7 Feb 2009, Frank Barknecht wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Messages don't have anything comparable to the canvas' $0.
>>>
I missed this the first time it went by, and I think it's central to
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:57:06AM -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> But it does
> make a lot more sense if we don't think about how else it could have
> been and instead just accept it as it is...
the winter sunshine,
cold hands connecting boxes;
Pd crashed again.
[bang(/[until],
Chris.
---
There is already [route] to get the selectors bang, symbol, list,
float and only 'other'. But it would be nice to have something like
this :
[33 hello -4.5 world(
|
[$0(
|
[print]
and get print: list
not 0 as now
or
[open mytext.txt 45(
|
[$0(
|
[print]
and get print: open
not 0 as now
(an
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Messages don't have anything comparable to the canvas' $0.
A possible alternative use for $0 in messages would be the selector
("list", "symbol", ...) a
Hallo,
Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Feb 2009, Frank Barknecht wrote:
>
> >Messages don't have anything comparable to the canvas' $0.
> >A possible alternative use for $0 in messages would be the selector
> >("list", "symbol", ...) as that is the thing before
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, zmoel...@iem.at wrote:
i think it is simple, if the users understand the philosophical idea
behind $args in message-boxes vs objects. hence my long explanations.
once you understand what you are doing, it becomes quite simple to make
Pd what you want (and why it does make s
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Messages don't have anything comparable to the canvas' $0.
A possible alternative use for $0 in messages would be the selector
("list", "symbol", ...) as that is the thing before $1, but
implementing that could be even more confusing to beginners.
Why
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009, Claude Heiland-Allen wrote:
I don't know why, but it makes parsing Pd patches 1000x less
straightforward than required (you need a two-phase parser that has a
special exception to detect message boxes and not expand dollars,
allowing the message box objects to parse them it
Frank Barknecht wrote:
> I see a third option: $0 is not only different from the $-variables in
> message boxes, but it's also different from the $-variables used as
> object arguments.[1] So another way out would be to replace only "$0"
> with something like "#0".
Yes. This, at least, would end
Quoting "Frank Barknecht" :
> Hallo,
> Matt Barber hat gesagt: // Matt Barber wrote:
>
>> I only see two options:
>
> I see a third option: $0 is not only different from the $-variables in
> message boxes, but it's also different from the $-variables used as
> object arguments.[1] So another way o
Hallo,
Matt Barber hat gesagt: // Matt Barber wrote:
> I only see two options:
I see a third option: $0 is not only different from the $-variables in
message boxes, but it's also different from the $-variables used as
object arguments.[1] So another way out would be to replace only "$0"
with so
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Georg Werner hat gesagt: // Georg Werner wrote:
i mean message boxes. i think there is the misunderstanding. you dont
send $1 as a message, too. not as message nor creation argument.
its an expanded string inside an object or when it leaves a messagebox
ll abstraction
>> instance msg's
>>
>> Seems like that would be consistent with the language as far as I understand
>> it.
>>
>> -Jonathan
>>
>> --- On Mon, 2/9/09, Matt Barber wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From: Matt Barber
>
common to all abstraction
> instance msg's
>
> Seems like that would be consistent with the language as far as I understand
> it.
>
> -Jonathan
>
> --- On Mon, 2/9/09, Matt Barber wrote:
>
>> From: Matt Barber
>> Subject: Re: [PD] here I go again..dynam
Oops, I screwed up that ascii art patch. It should be more like this:
[loadbang]
|
[f $0]
|
[; set dollarzero $1(
-Jonathan
--- On Mon, 2/9/09, Matt Barber wrote:
> From: Matt Barber
> Subject: Re: [PD] here I go again..dynamic abstractions
> To: "PD-List"
> Date: Mo
bably breaks the
> consistency of the
> language.
>
>
> Matt
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 13:33:36 +0100
> > From: Georg Werner
> > Subject: Re: [PD] here I go again..dynamic
> abstractions
> > To: pd-list@iem.at
> > Message-ID: <499022a0.70
e as in
object boxes) -- but then this probably breaks the consistency of the
language.
Matt
> Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 13:33:36 +0100
> From: Georg Werner
> Subject: Re: [PD] here I go again..dynamic abstractions
> To: pd-list@iem.at
> Message-ID: <499022a0.7080...@fricklr.de>
>
Quoting "Georg Werner" :
> hi,
>
> Frank Barknecht:
> > How about making $0 in messages be a message counter?
> if somebody really needs that - i dont ;)
>
> ok, i give up. i think we are on a rather philosophical point now.
yes, that's m point
> but i had a lot of times when students where ask
hi,
Frank Barknecht:
> How about making $0 in messages be a message counter?
if somebody really needs that - i dont ;)
ok, i give up. i think we are on a rather philosophical point now.
but i had a lot of times when students where asking why they have to
write [f $0]-[foobar $1( instead of [foo
Quoting "Georg Werner" :
> Hi,
>
> i mean message boxes. i think there is the misunderstanding. you dont
> send $1 as a message, too. not as message nor creation argument.
ok.
i am only trying to explain why it is like it is without resorting to
implementation-issues, but instead based on a mo
Hallo,
Georg Werner hat gesagt: // Georg Werner wrote:
> i mean message boxes. i think there is the misunderstanding. you dont
> send $1 as a message, too. not as message nor creation argument.
> its an expanded string inside an object or when it leaves a messagebox.
$0 is just an abstraction cou
Hi,
i mean message boxes. i think there is the misunderstanding. you dont
send $1 as a message, too. not as message nor creation argument.
its an expanded string inside an object or when it leaves a messagebox.
georg
IOhannes m zmoelnig schrieb:
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:08:05PM +0100, Georg
Hallo,
Georg Werner hat gesagt: // Georg Werner wrote:
> can somebody explain why there is a "3rd rule of $-expansion: 'there is
> no $0 in message-boxes'".
> i stumble every now and then about it and it is IMHO not
> self-explanatory. it is not hard to implement and wouldn't make problems
> wi
Hi Claude,
thanks for your explanation - i got your point, but this 2-phase parser
is (must have been) already implemented in Pd. So, where do you see a
problem in expanding/replacing $0 in "Phase 2" - like $1 etc. (with that
special fixed value)?
georg
Claude Heiland-Allen schrieb:
> Georg We
Georg Werner wrote:
> hi,
Hi Georg,
> can somebody explain why there is a "3rd rule of $-expansion: 'there is
> no $0 in message-boxes'".
The following is from an implementor's viewpoint, not a user's
viewpoint, so be warned :)
I don't know why, but it makes parsing Pd patches 1000x less
str
hi,
can somebody explain why there is a "3rd rule of $-expansion: 'there is
no $0 in message-boxes'".
i stumble every now and then about it and it is IMHO not
self-explanatory. it is not hard to implement and wouldn't make problems
with existing patches - because $0 is never used in messages. a
On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 10:51:38AM +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> Rory Walsh wrote:
> >Thanks IOhannes. I'll be happy soon I feel. If I understand correctly,
> >by changing the names of the GUI's receive symbol to $0-tgl-1 and then
> >using that symbol of '$0-tgl-1' as a send everything should
Rory Walsh wrote:
Thanks IOhannes. I'll be happy soon I feel. If I understand correctly,
by changing the names of the GUI's receive symbol to $0-tgl-1 and then
using that symbol of '$0-tgl-1' as a send everything should be
hunky-dory? I'm afraid it's still not working as I expect, I get a
load of
Rory Walsh wrote:
> [...]
read about $0.
it does exactly what you want without having to dynamically change anything.
just use "$0-tgl-1" as a send/receive name in each abstractions and be
happy.
fgmadsr
IOhannes
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
I keep running into problem with an abstraction I'm trying to
implement. Let me first explain what I'm trying to do. I have an
abstraction that has 16 tgls in a row. These are graphed on parent so
they they can be altered from the main patch. When a user clicks on of
the tgls it changes colour. Thi
33 matches
Mail list logo
