On Aug 11, 2006, at 10:26 AM, Jamie Bullock wrote:
Hi,
This kind of follows on from the recent thread about settable [s]. One thing I have never understood about PD, is why only one side of the [catch~]/[throw~], [s~]/[r~] is settable, and why it is the sender with the former, and the receiver with the latter?
because [s~]/[r~] is a 1-to-n connection (with n=0..N) and [throw~]/[catch~] is a n-to-n connection. making both ends settable in (one of) the two pairs, will eventually invalidate the "1"-side of this relation (and "1" is really a fixed size)
Enrique Erne wrote:
hi Jamie
it'd be nice to have a setable r~/s~ or catch~/throw~... attached a solution with throw~ -> catch~ -> s~ -> r~
i haven't looked at your patch, but this is the way to go: combine [catch~]+[send~] or [r~]/[throw~] to achieve whatever you want.
so you can set both. that will delay the signal about 2 blocks :-(
not if you have the correct execution order. (but probably i _should_ have a look at your patch)
mfga.dr IOhannes
and i think it might not be suitable for dynamic patching since it will get an error without the catch~ or s~ ..