Hi Miller,
well, it's intentional: you get all the pointer&integer arguments, THEN all the flost arguments. It's easier to implement message-passing efficiently this way. (I should have written this down somewhere!)
even if it's intentional, i dont like it very much. I find it better to sacrifice two or three cpu cycles for more flexibility. Of course, one can do it with gimme arguments, but it's for sure even slower then..... The reason why i stumbled across this issue is that it works in Max/MSP.
greetings, Thomas
sure, but there's no flexibility lost; you can have the _message_ put the args in any order; it's just that they show up ints first in the C code.
cheers Miller
On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 09:48:34PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote:
Hi Miller,
well, it's intentional: you get all the pointer&integer arguments, THEN all the flost arguments. It's easier to implement message-passing efficiently this way. (I should have written this down somewhere!)
even if it's intentional, i dont like it very much. I find it better to sacrifice two or three cpu cycles for more flexibility. Of course, one can do it with gimme arguments, but it's for sure even slower then..... The reason why i stumbled across this issue is that it works in Max/MSP.
greetings, Thomas
sure, but there's no flexibility lost; you can have the _message_ put the args in any order; it's just that they show up ints first in the C code.
Ok, i misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying that. That's giving me a hard time with flext and MaxMSP compatibility....
greetings, Thomas
-
Miller Puckette -
Thomas Grill