Hello all,
I'd like to make a motion that [arraysize] (by Pix) be included in the main PD distribution and be considered for inclusion as a "native PD object".
My reasons:
1. PD lacks this tool and although it is available as an external, I feel that this functionality is essential and should be "internal".
2. PD object names like [getsize] and [setsize] are misleading...particularly when those reference files refer to "the size of an array". Obviously this matter would be clarified if users were presented with [arraysize] also - I'm guessing that PD users would clearly understand the different applications for these 'related' objects.
2. I have just finished writing an abstraction entitled "all_about_arrays" for PDDP which will be included as a supplement to the PDDP reference files regarding [tabread], [tabwrite], [tabsend~], [tabwhatever] etc. To demonstrate some of the "usefulness" of arrays (i.e. wave editing, concatenating two arrays, slicing and splicing arrays, joining arrays, reversing an array, etc.) I have found it necessary to use [arraysize] and I would prefer that users not have to download and install an external object just to understand these tutorials. Particularly when determining the length of an array is such a standard procedure in high level programming environments.
If anybody has any objections, I'd like to discuss this matter. Otherwise, should Miller make a decision on this?
I don't know how Pix feels about this, as I have never discussed it with him.
If all developers vote "no", then what is the best method for PDDP to include [arraysize] in the reference files? Should I link to the CVS? Should I keep an updated arraysize.dll in the downloadable zip? Should I assume that most users would have the foresight to have already downloaded arraysize.dll?
Regards, Dave Sabine