Since this abstraction is not working yet I have started to do the math myself the way you mentioned and I realized I'm going to have to bind a *lot* of MIDI parameters and they will often change so I'd like to make this abstraction work and I thought setting a variable was easy.
I was trying to do that "sub" abstraction you are talking about so yes it makes a lot of sense but I didn't succeed so I'm not sure I really get it but if you say it works then I'm going to try again.
thanks
derek holzer wrote:
Well, I see exactly what you are trying to do, but it's not exactly the right way to do it.
In this case, you would have to set the value of $3 external to the abstraction. Since the [ctlin] object doesn't take any inputs, it can only get variables from creation arguments.
If you really wanted to dynamically create this abstraction, which would automatically create the LSB channel of the control in message, you could create another abstraction within the abstraction, and add 32 to the channel number in the first-level abstraction which would pass it as a creation argument to the inner-most abstraction.
Does that make sense?
Otherwise, and probably what I would do, would be to simply create the abstraction you made already with three creation arguments and do the math yourself, i.e. make $3 equal to $1 + 32. Unless you're stubborn and you simply *must* have the computer do all the work for you ;-)
Or maybe you have a more compelling reason why PD should dynamically create these [ctlin]s without you having to think about it...?
best, d.
AshK wrote:
well I keep working on this patch on the working PD and I need help about how I can pass the $3 variable to the second [ctlin] (the one that uses $3 as an argument) ?