Hallo, Patrice Colet hat gesagt: // Patrice Colet wrote:
Hello, Frank Barknecht a écrit : However messages reaching a message box do not
carry such an unique identifier, as $0 is a property of the canvas, not a property of the incoming message: There is no $0 in messages, there's only a $0 in a canvas. An effect of this is, that there's no $0 in message boxes, but there's a $0 in object boxes. So to get $0...
Ciao
I was just wondering why $0 wouldn't be implemented as a message property.
You mean as a property of a "message" or as a property of a "message box"? (In my previous mail, I tried to make a difference between both and tried to write "message box" where I was talking about a "message box" and only message, where general messages were meant. I might have made some mistakes during that, though.)
A message (like "list 10 20 30") doesn't know anything about the thing called $0 with canvases. Messages aren't bound to a certain canvas, they can be sent freely between various "cancas scopes" with different $0s.
Messages do know about their $2, which is just another name for their second item. For "list 10 20 30" this message's $2 would be: "20". But I don't really see, how something like "$0 for messages" (not message boxes!) would make any sense.
For message boxes however one *could* define, that $0 should be replaced by the value of $0 taken from the canvas, the message box sits in, as soon the box is activated (by click or an incoming message). However this would somehow change the direct relationship messages and message boxes currently have: It would rely on the fact, that message boxes also are a kind of object in a canvas and don't just represent a Pd message as objects exchange them. In the end, a message box wouldn't be very different from a fancy, clickable [makefilename] or [list ...] object.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__