> To: pd-list@lists.iem.at <mailto:pd-list@lists.iem.at>
> Subject: Re: [PD] should 'flags' always come first?
> Message-ID: <6e75e36e-14ef-0793-6e9f-4b1b1cbfe...@iem.at
> <mailto:6e75e36e-14ef-0793-6e9f-4b1b1cbfe...@iem.at>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=
Em dom., 27 de fev. de 2022 às 20:58, Christof Ressi
escreveu:
> On 28.02.2022 00:26, José de Abreu wrote:
>
> > but on the other hand, pd also has the opposite case, where flags
> > comes in the end, they are on the text family objects, specifically
> > the [text sequence] object
>
> [text
On 2/28/22 17:47, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
I know, that's because they should come first! This is why I think it's
confusing that sigmund~ doesn't complain and it just works...
i doubt that it is confusing.
but: if you do find it confusing, just put the flags at the beginning.
it's not
Em dom., 27 de fev. de 2022 às 20:26, José de Abreu
escreveu:
> but not all objects works if the flags appear in different order,
>
I know, that's because they should come first! This is why I think it's
confusing that sigmund~ doesn't complain and it just works...
[netreceive -u 5000] will
On 28.02.2022 00:26, José de Abreu wrote:
but on the other hand, pd also has the opposite case, where flags
comes in the end, they are on the text family objects, specifically
the [text sequence] object
[text sequence] is really an outlier. Typically, flags come *before*
positional
some thoughts:
i think that sigmund~ is ok with flags that come last, because of the way
that sigmund~ parses its arguments. It doesn't impose any order, since the
user will create it the way it wants ([sigmund~ env pitch] and [sigmund~
pitch env] are both valid and gets its outlets swapped, and
IMO there is a convention that "flags" should come before positional
arguments - but after "methods", like in [text define -k foo].
[sigmund~] is a curious case because its arguments "pitch", "notes",
"env", "peaks" and "tracks" are *not* positional arguments but rather
named arguments.
I didn't mean to define things in a broader sense outside the context of
Pd. I'm just concerned in defining what is the "official" settings and
behaviour of flags in Pd.
Em dom., 27 de fev. de 2022 às 06:33, IOhannes m zmölnig
escreveu:
> that's typically not how it works. see Postel's law.
>
On 2/27/22 10:05, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
Em dom., 27 de fev. de 2022 às 05:26, IOhannes m zmölnig
escreveu:
Many objects in Pd are coded in a way to reject creation arguments in the
wrong order. The bug would be that it allows it.
that's typically not how it works. see Postel's law.
Em dom., 27 de fev. de 2022 às 05:26, IOhannes m zmölnig
escreveu:
> What exactly is the buggy behaviour?
>
If in fact flags should always come first, the object shouldn't load it in
an incorrect order.
Many objects in Pd are coded in a way to reject creation arguments in the
wrong order. The
Am 27. Februar 2022 02:23:54 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Torres Porres
:
>
>Is this a bug in [sigmund~]?
What exactly is the buggy behaviour?
mfg.sfg.jfd
IOhannes
___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
Hi, it's me again in my Pd documentation revision.
I have the idea that "flags" are a special kind of creation arguments.
Here's how to define them:
- They start with "-".
- They're always optional
- They come before "actual" arguments.
Now, I'm not sure about the last rule. I just tried it
12 matches
Mail list logo
