I'd say this is a "paper cut." It's a small issue easily worked around by the addition of an extra step, but that extra step is painful due to it's repetition. Also, I've seen it be a confusing step for many beginners once they learn to use $0 in objects, ie [f $0], [symbol $0], etc.
I'm on the side of $0 in message boxes. I don't see how this change would break anything since $0 currently resolves to 0 (I think), and I cannot imagine anyone relying on this. Is it a controversy?
On Sep 4, 2018, at 9:41 AM, pd-dev-request@lists.iem.at wrote:
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 21:02:39 -0700 From: Miller Puckette <msp@ucsd.edu mailto:msp@ucsd.edu> To: Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com mailto:porres@gmail.com> Cc: Henri Augusto Bisognini <msndohenri@hotmail.com mailto:msndohenri@hotmail.com>, pd-dev <pd-dev@lists.iem.at mailto:pd-dev@lists.iem.at> Subject: Re: [PD-dev] roadmap for Pd-0.49? Message-ID: <20180904040239.GF25025@ucsd.edu mailto:20180904040239.GF25025@ucsd.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
This one is mired in controversy. Meanwhile, you can get "$0" functionality in a message box by preceeding it with "list prepend $0" so that $1 in the message box is teh patch's $0 and the other $ arguments are renumbered by one.
cheers Miller
-------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika http://twitter.com/danomatika danomatika.com http://danomatika.com/ robotcowboy.com http://robotcowboy.com/
I say it's a workaround, hehe, I'm used to dealing with this in many ways, but it gets a little painful doing them every time. Things would be much easier if it'd just work.
cheers
Em ter, 4 de set de 2018 às 04:55, Dan Wilcox danomatika@gmail.com escreveu:
I'd say this is a "paper cut." It's a small issue easily worked around by the addition of an extra step, but that extra step is painful due to it's repetition. Also, I've seen it be a confusing step for many beginners once they learn to use $0 in objects, ie [f $0], [symbol $0], etc.
I'm on the side of $0 in message boxes. I don't see how this change would break anything since $0 currently resolves to 0 (I think), and I cannot imagine anyone relying on this. Is it a controversy?
On Sep 4, 2018, at 9:41 AM, pd-dev-request@lists.iem.at wrote:
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 21:02:39 -0700 From: Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu To: Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com Cc: Henri Augusto Bisognini msndohenri@hotmail.com, pd-dev pd-dev@lists.iem.at Subject: Re: [PD-dev] roadmap for Pd-0.49? Message-ID: 20180904040239.GF25025@ucsd.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
This one is mired in controversy. Meanwhile, you can get "$0" functionality in a message box by preceeding it with "list prepend $0" so that $1 in the message box is teh patch's $0 and the other $ arguments are renumbered by one.
cheers Miller
Dan Wilcox @danomatika http://twitter.com/danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com
-
Alexandre Torres Porres -
Dan Wilcox