On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:
The best way of showing that I mean so, would be attempting to improve receive's handling of the 'set' message -- but I do not know how to do it right.
The main trouble is how to sense which 'set' is remote, and which has come via an inlet. It might be done by not binding a [receive] itself to a symbol, but binding a proxy object instead. However, it would involve a complete rewrite of the class, and this is something which should involve much better understanding of the 'core' than mine!
I'd say we can postpone this problem, therefore I removed receive's set message.
Maybe someone will implement your suggestion in an external, or we can find a general solution ala Miller.
And thanks for tracking this down, I probably would never have given it a second thought.
Hoping you are well now, and there is still some time left for your holidays,
Yes there was, batteries recharged
Guenter