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__;!!...
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev__;!!...