On Jan 15, 2006, at 4:01 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Thomas Grill wrote:
do you mean, is there a reason for my patch, a reason for $0 or a reason for $0 being "different" in messages?
the latter (your patch is great, although i'd like to have even more
well i think this is very consistent: $args in messages refer _only_ to parameters of incoming messages, while $args in objects refer only to parameters of upstream objects. (and $0 is bound to the class instance)
however, i think that "$0" is a bad name. i would have liked it better if $0 was the selector (in messages) and the classname (in abstractions). probably "$$" would have been better for a uniq id (well, i know that this is a bashism (its the process-id in bash), but that is not necessarily bad)
This sounds logical. I have a question about the selector tho. So if I send [1 2 3(, would the $0 selector be "list" or would it be "1"?
As for implementing this, we could add $$ as the instance ID, and $0 in messages as the selector. Then have $0 default to classname in objects, but have a startup flag that reverted $0 to the old behavior for running old patches. Why we are at it, $# for number of arguments and $@ for all arguments would be nice too.
flexible $args-processing).
this is on my todo-list. 1st thing todo (soon!) is to remove the restriction that dollsyms have to start with $
Yes, this would be good.
(while this restriction makes parsing trivial it is cumbersome at the best) 2nd thing todo (LATER!) is a mechanism for stacked $args, like ${$1-2}
Stacked args would complicate things more than its worth. I think it is getting away from the graphical nature of Pd programming and I can't think of any parallel structure in any language that uses $ variables. Couldn't you just use stacked messages with regular $ args? That would be much more Pd-ish.
.hc
Sorry for continuing in your thread.
better in this thread than never...
mfmgasdr IOhannes
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
________________________________________________________________________ ____
"Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice, it can change entire economies." - Amy Smith