I should clarify this by adding that the side-effect won't happen if you edit an abstraction's inlets/outlets without any objects that include that abstraction being open at the time. Apparently, the change causes a re-instantiation of the abstraction in the parent, breaking the inlet/outlet connections.
On 6/19/12 1:22 PM, Phil Stone wrote:
One potentially nasty drawback to this practice (I found) was that if you change the pseudo-argument in any way, you lose whatever connections were made to that inlet or outlet in the outer patch. I agree with you that comments are a pain in the neck, but at least they don't exhibit this often hard-to-find side effect.
Phil www.pkstonemusic.com
On 6/19/12 12:41 PM, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
quick question: is it legal to (ab)use creation parameters to inlets and outlets for documentation, or does that lead to unwanted side effects?
i'd like to do something like this:
[inlet Set level in dB] [inlet Set Fader position in mm]
[outlet Current level in dB] [outlet Current Fader position in mm] [outlet~ Gain coefficient]
of course i could use comments, but i don't like the way they don't line-wrap in a controlled way, plus their association to what they are annotating is a bit weak for my taste...
best,
jörn
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list