----- Original Message -----
From: Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu To: Ivica Ico Bukvic ico@vt.edu Cc: "pd-list@iem.at" pd-list@iem.at Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 1:13 AM Subject: Re: [PD] variable receive objects?
Lots of stuff - grep s_thing *.c :)
One weak way to proceed might be to maintain a static "count" that increments anytime anyone unbinds anything in all of Pd and break out of the loops in bindlist_bang() etc if the number changes. A more specific but slightly uglier approach would be to maintain such a count per-symbol. but it seems quite a bit of baggage jus to allow receive to have that inlet.
The main aim in my opinion would be to keep iemguis from being crash-able.
-Jonathan
cheers Miller
Never mind. Just had a look at pd_bind/unbind code. This makes me wonder what if all bindings/unbindings were handled as lists? Would this potentially break anything (other than having to modify bind/unbind mechanism)? Does anything else depend on 2-member list vs. 1-member pointer in terms of bindings? I suspect there would be some cpu impact on having it implemented this way, but not that much.
-- Ivica Ico Bukvic, D.M.A Composition, Music Technology Director, DISIS Interactive Sound& Intermedia Studio Director, L2Ork Linux Laptop Orchestra Head, ICAT Integrative Performance Studio Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, VA 24061-0240 (540) 231-6139 (540) 231-5034 (fax) disis.music.vt.edu l2ork.music.vt.edu ico.bukvic.net
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list