Your abstraction can have a named [send~] which you can receive into your matrix. Use the $1 id assigned by clone to differentiate the sends, ie.

In abstraction:

|
[send~ out$1]

For matrix:

[receive~ out1]  [receive~ out2] [receive~ out3]
|                |               |
[matrix          -               -          ...]

etc

In this way, the [clone] itself has no outputs, but you have all of the outputs via [send~]. I use this approach very often.

On Jun 5, 2020, at 7:49 PM, pd-list-request@lists.iem.at wrote:

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 19:20:36 +0200
From: baptiste chatel <baptiste.chatel@gmail.com>
To: Pd-List <pd-list@lists.iem.at>
Subject: [PD] [clone] with individual signal inlets/outlets exposed ?
Message-ID:
<CABrNpLyvGHrRV-+9wDj2p8NnZENQDwEgg-tO7yFHEjw5L1eV6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Would it be possible to have a [clone] option that allows clones individual
signal inlets/outlets to be exposed ?

An example : i need to make 64 of the following patch :
[receive~ thing-$1]
|
[outlet~]
that should go to a matrix, $1 in [1:64].

[clone] is useless because it will sum all outputs and expose only one,
since the cloned patch has one output.

I could do it with dynamic patching, but as practical as it could be, it is
pretty convoluted to use for such a simple need.


Baptiste

--------
Dan Wilcox
@danomatika
danomatika.com
robotcowboy.com