Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Thomas Sivertsen hat gesagt: // Thomas Sivertsen wrote:
Ah, yes. I get this. The weird thing is happening in [prepend] then, because it does not handle the symbol as an identifier for the data, but as part of the data. Now, which version/incantation of [prepend], you may ask?
The prepend from Cyclone does not do this. Maybe you are using the one from IEMlib? Or the one in Ggee or prepend2 or ...
the problem i see is, that it often makes sense to prepend another identifier to "anythings".
eg: i have a message [play myfile.wav( ("play" being an identifier) and want to transmit this message via [netsend] so i have to prepend a "send" identifier to get [send play myfile.way(. one could argue, that "symbol" should be handled in a different way, but probably i would like to transmit a symbol "mobo" via netsend: if i would substitute the "symbol" by "send" (e.g: [send mobo() i would receive an identifier "mobo" on the [netreceive] side, which i cannot just convert with [symbol] if i also want to send things like [play myfile.wav( over the same [netsend]/[netreceive] connection (because it would strip down to a symbol "play" without the "myfile.wav")
so what to do ? a) make pd's message-type system more consistent (will probably break quite everything) b) use [a2l] (bias!!) or something similar with a standardized (as you suggested) [prepend]
probably it would be a good idea to make [a2l] built into pd too (maybe [trigger list] should be enhanced to convert anythings to lists)
and of course günter is right, when he points out the inconsistency between [append] and [prepend] but there is really not very much we could do about it (apart from renaming all the datastructure-stuff to something more specific)
mfg.asd.r IOhannes