On Jan 21, 2006, at 5:29 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
What is a major hinderance is the list vs. undefined set quandary.
One major hinderance is your insistence on calling them undefined sets.
I like to call lists with a list selector "list-lists".
Suppose that the Pd of your dreams comes to existence, and that may mean without any so-called "undefined sets". Every message would be a "list".
Actually I believe, the only real practical problem that lists/messages and list-lists had in the past was, that it was a bit hard to make a list-list out of a general list/message. (Stripping the list-selector and converting back to a message-list is possible, too, with [list trim], but was possible with [route list] as well.) [list $1 $2...( could be ambigious and it didn't work with arbitrary length message-lists.
But with pd-0.39 this issue is solved thanks to the [list] object, that automatically converts everything to a full-blown list-list, if one is needed. This is another reason to upgrade to 0.39 soon, if someone hasn't done so yet.
Sadly, this doesn't fix the problems [route] and [print] have with lists. See [pd has some odd cases of list handling] in doc/pddp/all_about_lists_vs_anythings.pd
.hc
________________________________________________________________________ ____
There is no way to peace, peace is the way. -A.J. Muste