> is the same as in an object.
Putting them as separate concepts I see "$1, $2 ... $n" as two different things wether in messages or objects, and that "$0" is just useless in messages.
Anyway, I am cool with what needs to be done in order to put "$0" in messages, I still think it's a bit of an unnecessary hassle, but it ain't that much of a big deal after all.
The thing that had no other way around was using the Find feature to actually find them, so I thought about bringing this all up: the hassle and the problem.
I now see that uncheking "whole word" in the new version is just another "way around" rather than actually getting the Find feature to look for "$0", or even for the window number once we explicitly tell it which one it is.
So, nerverminding about "$0" in messages, I would still make a point here for the Find feature to be able to find "$0", I hope it isn't much hassle getting it to do so.
Thanks a bunch folks!
Cheers
alex
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Roman Haefeli
<reduzierer@yahoo.de> wrote:
> But I totally disagree, I have been teaching a lot basic Pd around, and people
> always get confused and think they can just throw "$0" in messages. So I have
> to state and reinforce that there is an exception that it doesn't work on
> messages.
Calling this an exception creates the impression, that $1 in a message is the same as in an object.
> Without an exception at all, it should be easier to get it, as I
> understand.
Agreed. But currently, the only thing that makes $0 in a message exceptional
is the fact, that it has no meaning at all. Making it be replaced by the
canvas identifier wouldn't make it less exceptional at all.
roman
___________________________________________________________
Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail:
http://mail.yahoo.de