Max (I think) had the suggestion of using established audio tech terms -> [snake~] and [breakout~] where "breakout" refers to a breakout box from a physical audio snake. It might translate a bit better than a non-word like "unsnake" ?
You could take it further to [breakin~] / [breakout~] but I don't believe "breakin" is really used in the audio context, at least the part hat I deal with.
For a single channel, [tap~] makes conceptual sense to me but then this is perhaps a different (water) metaphor?
No matter what is chosen, it's nice to go through the options a this is one of these parts of the API that can't be (easily) changed later on. For my own projects, I offend agonize over the naming at the beginning.
Message: 3Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 20:48:52 -0800From: Miller Puckette <msp@ucsd.edu>To: Christof Ressi <info@christofressi.com>Cc: pd-dev@lists.iem.atSubject: Re: [PD-dev] pack~/unpack~ (was Re: multichannel signals, preliminary support)Message-ID: <Y9C0tCTVCxWeMaqd@ucsd.edu>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1OK... 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 beeasier for non-native English speakers to deal with?cheersMiller