Hallo, Tim Blechmann hat gesagt: // Tim Blechmann wrote:
Well, then how should Pd solve the logical pitfalls in your opinion?
mark the object as deletable, if the messaging is happening, wait for the object to return from the message function, then it can be safely deleted. implementing it shouldn't be difficult as it is completely compatible with pd's synchronous architecture.
If I understand it right, what you suggest is similar to adding a [delay] object into the chain to defer the actual killing to a point, when all current operations are complete.
But additionally your proposal would introduce the possibility, that an object disappears, before all other objects have completed the current logical step, too. So the bottom line would be dividing the single logical step we have now into two (or even more) steps, that all need to be executed in the correct order. What's the gain of making execution order more complicated? I guess this is not just to allow sloppily coded suicides.
(I'm a bit worried because a lot of the problems people have with their patches are there, because they didn't get the execution order right. Complicating this area could confuse them even more.)
Ciao