Hi,
I would suggest to implement a 'send' message into send. Then one could do something like this:
- sending 'set 10': [send set 10< - [s away]
- sending 'send 23': [send send 23< - [s away]
- and the normal way, sending 'whatever 17.3': [whatever 17.3< - [s away]
This way we could also send messages starting with 'set' and would still be able to send messages starting with 'send'. A workaround would be to prepend all messages with, lets say, 'dummy' and throw this first element away on the receive side....
Olaf
Peter Lunden schrieb:
I think I have to more specific about the problem. In some of the GUI objects there is built in receivers and senders that you set the name of in its preferences. This mechanism is now partly broken because of the new message implemented in [send]
This is how I like to do it, to be able to build nice user interfaces:
float --> [set $0 ( --> [s directly_to_GUI] [r directly_from_GUI]-> same float
It is nesesery to use a set to avoid loops. This makes it possible to have several syncronized sliders at different places controling the same value using the same message.
--PLu
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
You could do it like this:
float --> [s volume] -> [r volume] --> [prepend set] --> [vsl]
.hc
On Thursday, Apr 3, 2003, at 06:46 America/New_York, Peter Lunden wrote:
set message to change the address of the send box is nice but how do you send the message "set 10" to a vsl now. I think it is good to keep the possibility to send set messages to vsl using a send box so the message to change the send should have another name.
--PLu
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev