On Sun, 15 Jan 2006, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
however, i think that "$0" is a bad name. i would have liked it better if $0 was the selector (in messages)
I agree. It's especially nice as most anythings are accepted by messageboxes (except those starting by methodnames of messageboxes such as "set").
Yesterday at PureData Montréal 16, someone wrote $0 in a messagebox and printed it. It was garbage because the output wasn't a valid t_symbol*. He was expecting it to output the selector.
and the classname (in abstractions).
I agree that it should be the classname in order to be consistent with the above use of messageboxes, and because it's very intuitive: if you write [foo 42 bar] then $0 should be foo just like $1 is 42 and $2 is bar.
probably "$$" would have been better for a uniq id (well, i know that this is a bashism (its the process-id in bash), but that is not necessarily bad)
I would have preferred "$$" too. That slashed S symbol called "dollar" is a mnemonic in several languages, for a word that starts with S: in BASIC it meant String, in Perl it means Scalar, in Ruby it might mean Special (because Sglobal isn't quite a word). In Bash, Tcl and Pd it means Substitution. Possibly that "$$" could be remembered as Substitute Self.
2nd thing todo (LATER!) is a mechanism for stacked $args, like ${$1-2}
What does that mean?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada