[route] outputs an empty list which, for simplicity's sake, is supposed to be interpreted as a "bang" message. But [pack] isn't doing this:
[list( | [pack] | [print]
Should be a pretty easy fix-- just check for an empty list in pack_list and if so, call pack_bang.
-Jonathan
--- On Thu, 7/7/11, Jack jack@rybn.org wrote:
From: Jack jack@rybn.org Subject: Re: [PD] route - pack issue To: "Joe White" white.joe4@gmail.com Cc: "pd-list" pd-list@iem.at Date: Thursday, July 7, 2011, 6:57 PM Yep, there is a bug. For a workaround, you can add a [bang( message between [route] and [pack]. ++
Jack
Le jeudi 07 juillet 2011 à 17:44 +0100, Joe White a écrit :
Hi list,
I've been doing some patching with [route] and came
across a problem -
I'd love it if someone could explain why this happens
otherwise I
think it's a bug.
Basically I'm sending a message with one item to a
route object with
an argument of the same name. For example:
[start ( | [route start]
This is connected to a [pack f]. When I bang the start
message the
route object outputs a bang, which in turn should
output the stored
number in the pack object. However, this does not
happen (which is the
problem).
If I connect a [t b] after the [route] and before the
[pack f] it
works. It also works with [f ] instead of [pack f] and
a [select]
object will correctly bang the pack. I've attached a
patch to show
this.
What seems weird is that it is not a problem with
either [route] or
[pack f] on their own, but rather only when they are
connected.
Thanks, Joe _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at
mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list