--- On Mon, 8/23/10, IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
From: IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD-dev] initbang and friends WAS: run-up to release 0.43 To: pd-dev@iem.at Date: Monday, August 23, 2010, 6:07 PM On 2010-08-23 17:33, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Yeah, we definitely don't want [initbang] to be used
too often, I can
i would also like to state, that we shouldn't use [metro] too often. reversely, one cannot use [trigger] too often. so Pd should print out a warning if there is no [t] in the patch whenever it is saved.
understand that. I just differ with how we
should deal with the
problem. I think it should be handled in the
documentation rather than
making the programming part more complicated.
seriously, i don't see so many drawbacks with [initbang]. the biggest issue right now, is that there is no [initbang] in Pd-vanilla. this makes patches using [initbang] incompatible with Pd-vanilla. once it was included, this issue would become nought.
I agree that is the overriding issue.
I could see the initbang help path having a section
called "When to NOT
use initbang" then it would include your example below
with the example
of how to use it.
hmm, i guess some words are missing here, as i don't understand why we would include an example of how to use it in the "when to NOT use it" section.
I've revised the [initbang] help patch to include an example with dynamically creating an outlet. But after reading about your use of [initbang] in realtime patching, I just need to change the wording a little to make it clear that it's not the _only_ use for [initbang]
Btw-- in your live-coding example you mentioned you were sending the audio to a bus and would use [initbang] to fade in. But how do you use [closebang] to fade out? Does [closebang] send a trigger to one of the sister abstractions to do the fade out?
anyhow, in most cases [initbang] can be used as a replacement for [loadbang]. the only difference is, that [initbang] will not make it to the outside of the patch using [outlet]s.
Right-- in that case you would use Frank's method. Although in an oscillator bank patch I made, sending a "loadbang" message crashed Pd. I changed it to [r $1-loadbang] as a workaround, but I never went back and hunted down the original problem.
so you cannot use [initbang] to initialize the parent patch. darn, bad naming again. probably [createbang] would be better (esp. if [closebang] is renamed to [destroybang]) or use [constructorbang] and [destructorbang]
anyhow, whatever the name of the object (even [loadbang really-early]), th changes to the c-sources will be very similar.
[preloadbang]
The initbang help patch is in a pretty sorry state right now... its in SVN doc/pddp if anyone wants
to take it on.
probably we should wait whether this evolves before documenting things to be abandoned.
I'd rather risk irrelevant documentation in 2025 than have shoddy documentation right now.
-Jonathan
fgmasdr IOhannes
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev