So it seems that gem objects are initing everything to zero, things like colorRGB and translateXYZ don't work if you specify less than three values. It seems to me that those missing values should be set to zero, since that is how Pd generally works,
for example:
.hc
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
So it seems that gem objects are initing everything to zero, things like colorRGB and translateXYZ don't work if you specify less than three values. It seems to me that those missing values should be set to zero, since that is how Pd generally works,
hmm, i would prefer if elements that are used wrongly would not create at all.
e.g. if you make an object [translateXYZ 0 1] you will get an error message on the console "[translateXYZ]: needs 0 or 3 arguments". users should read the console and properly create the objects. i understand that nobody will have a look at the console everytime an object has been created. so they should be guided by some feedback: the best feedback i can imagine right now would be to fail to create the object.
the alternative would be to provide wrong default arguments. i cal lthem "wrong" because they will most likely be wrong in most cases. therefore i prefer to not impose them on the users.
mfg,asdr IOhannes
[pack 0 ]
On Mar 9, 2009, at 9:45 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
So it seems that gem objects are initing everything to zero, things like colorRGB and translateXYZ don't work if you specify less than three values. It seems to me that those missing values should be set to zero, since that is how Pd generally works,
hmm, i would prefer if elements that are used wrongly would not create at all.
e.g. if you make an object [translateXYZ 0 1] you will get an error message on the console "[translateXYZ]: needs 0 or 3 arguments". users should read the console and properly create the objects. i understand that nobody will have a look at the console everytime an object has been created. so they should be guided by some feedback: the best feedback i can imagine right now would be to fail to create the object.
the alternative would be to provide wrong default arguments. i cal lthem "wrong" because they will most likely be wrong in most cases. therefore i prefer to not impose them on the users.
Why is that wrong? I seems perfectly natural to me in Pd land, and I bring this up because students did exactly this. Values initialize to zero when not specified. There are definitely precedents to this in Pd-vanilla, why should Gem be different than Pd?
The other side of this question is: where is the harm in doing this? Would this cause any problems to make Gem be more like Pd?
.hc
mfg,asdr IOhannes
[pack 0 ]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no way to peace, peace is the way. -A.J. Muste
On Mar 9, 2009, at 11:58 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Mar 9, 2009, at 9:45 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
So it seems that gem objects are initing everything to zero, things like colorRGB and translateXYZ don't work if you specify less than three values. It seems to me that those missing values should be set to zero, since that is how Pd generally works,
hmm, i would prefer if elements that are used wrongly would not create at all.
e.g. if you make an object [translateXYZ 0 1] you will get an error message on the console "[translateXYZ]: needs 0 or 3 arguments". users should read the console and properly create the objects. i understand that nobody will have a look at the console everytime an object has been created. so they should be guided by some feedback: the best feedback i can imagine right now would be to fail to create the object.
the alternative would be to provide wrong default arguments. i cal lthem "wrong" because they will most likely be wrong in most cases. therefore i prefer to not impose them on the users.
Why is that wrong? I seems perfectly natural to me in Pd land, and I bring this up because students did exactly this. Values initialize to zero when not specified. There are definitely precedents to this in Pd-vanilla, why should Gem be different than Pd?
The other side of this question is: where is the harm in doing this? Would this cause any problems to make Gem be more like Pd?
<init_to_0_precedents.pd>
I never heard back on this one. I think it is important for Gem to be as much like Pd-vanilla objects as possible. It may not be what everyone wants to do, but I don't think it would cause harm or get in the way of anything so I think its worth adding. I'm willing to do the work.
.hc
.hc
mfg,asdr IOhannes
[pack 0 ]
There is no way to peace, peace is the way. -A.J. Muste
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"[T]he greatest purveyor of violence in the world today [is] my own government." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
I never heard back on this one. I think it is important for Gem to be as much like Pd-vanilla objects as possible. It may not be what everyone wants to do, but I don't think it would cause harm or get in the way of anything so I think its worth adding. I'm willing to do the work.
it's fixed in svn.
fgmasdr IOhannes
On Mar 23, 2009, at 4:10 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
I never heard back on this one. I think it is important for Gem to be as much like Pd-vanilla objects as possible. It may not be what everyone wants to do, but I don't think it would cause harm or get in the way of anything so I think its worth adding. I'm willing to do the work.
it's fixed in svn.
Wow, that was fast, thanks!
.hc
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. - Thomas Jefferson
-
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
IOhannes m zmoelnig