On Feb 7, 2006, at 4:32 PM, zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
Zitiere Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@eds.org:
So I am just going thru the x_arithmetic.c math classes, and I found that while most of them do respond to a bang, about 1/3 of them have no
method for bang. I would like to add a bang method to all these. I can't see any problem with doing this, anyone else? The new bang methods would act just like the other math object bang methods: the would output the last result.
These objects have a bang method:
- / pow max min == != > < >= <= & && | || << >> % mod div
These do not:
clip sin cos tan atan atan2 sqrt log exp abs
well the difference is, that [+],... are binops while [sin],... are unary operations.
the [bang(-method for binops is there for things like | [t b f] | | [+ ] |
since this is not needed it is not there for unops.
[clip] has 3 inlets and [atan2] has 2 inlets, so they are not unary operations. [clip] and [atan2] have their own classes, so that's easy.
It just seems consistent to have them all respond to a bang. Then you could get the last result easily without knowing when the last input was. But I can live for now with the unary operations ignoring bang. I do need [clip] to respond to a bang tho.
.hc
________________________________________________________________________ ____
¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!