I'm not sure if this dialog is anywhere near settled (I got lost in the tangle of medusa-like message threads), but here's a +1 for [snake~].
I like the [object~ method] convention and the unique object name fits well in Pd vernacular to my ears. It seems like there's room to tack on lots of helpful methods...[snake~ info] could give us the specs of a given connection.On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 5:58 AM Christof Ressi <info@christofressi.com> wrote:_______________________________________________
In any case, I am really liking now that "snake~" feels like an object familyMe too! It is now clear that these objects are all releated.
"snake~ in", "snake~ out"Actually, I would prefer [snake~ pack] and [snake~ unpack] because for me the meaning of "in" and "out" is ambigious. "pack" and "unpack", on the other hand, are pretty obvious.
Alternatively, we might just as well use [mc~ pack], [mc~ unpack], [mc~ split], etc. to save some keystrokes :-)
Christof
On 25.01.2023 11:48, Fede Cámara Halac wrote:
Yes, join/split would be translatable, whereas translating "snake" can be slippery.
I do think it is amusing, btw, and slides nicely next to sigmund~ and moses.
In any case, I am really liking now that "snake~" feels like an object family, that refers to the kind of signal,
and you can say things like "snake~ in", "snake~ out", or even "snake~ split", "snake~ join" ,
or further, "snake~ rotate/flip", "snake~ encode/decode"
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 5:49 AM Miller Puckette via Pd-dev <pd-dev@lists.iem.at> wrote:
OK... now I'm hesitating between "snake~ in", "snake~ out" and "snake~ tap"
or "join~", "split~", and "tap~"...
Former is more colorful (and crowds the namespace less). Latter might be
easier for non-native English speakers to deal with?
cheers
Miller
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 01:36:24AM +0100, Christof Ressi wrote:
> > Isn't "mux~/demux~" closest to what's actually happening?
> Unfortunately, these are also zexy objects ;-)
>
> On 24.01.2023 11:52, Max wrote:
> > Isn't "mux~/demux~" closest to what's actually happening?
> > when "joining" two signals, I wouldn't expect them to be running in
> > parallel but being mixed together.
> >
> > m.
> >
> >
> > On 24.01.23 02:50, Miller Puckette via Pd-dev wrote:
> > > So merging (hmm) some ideas from Fede and Dan, maybe "join~/split~", and
> > > a new tap~ object that allows you to pick channels out
> > > specifically. Then
> > > I think for example "clone osc~" might do OK for making an
> > > oscillator bank -
> > > assuming it turns out to be practical to send message-time lists to the
> > > frequency input. (Maybe that's someting clone should know how to do
> > > in other
> > > situations too).
> > >
> > > still thinking about, for instance, "clone -" to make clones of an
> > > anonymous
> > > abstraction that you just edit into being live...
> > >
> > > cheers
> > > Miller
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pd-dev mailing list
> > Pd-dev@lists.iem.at
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev__;!!Mih3wA!HryblqiKFNOUuYK6t8PJBkK26yPJYdgDiMv_z36_t9-4PQk9SJpBcxy7Jd13FSr1fRDVtVGBQd6WsA$
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev@lists.iem.at
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev__;!!Mih3wA!HryblqiKFNOUuYK6t8PJBkK26yPJYdgDiMv_z36_t9-4PQk9SJpBcxy7Jd13FSr1fRDVtVGBQd6WsA$
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@lists.iem.at
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
--
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@lists.iem.at
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
--_______________________________________________William Brent
“Great minds flock together”
Conflations: conversational idiom for the 21st century
www.conflations.com
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@lists.iem.at
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev