On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Roman Haefeli wrote:
i never had any problems with readability of my patches.
I've had problems with readability of my patches even though I've never used segmented patchcords (so, i'm not spoiled!). I can't make connection cycles without having patchcords go over objects (except some special cases). The alternative is to add a pair of [s]/[r] to the existing confusion.
i think there are few alternative ways to keep a patch readable than segmented patch chords, using subpatches or abstractions in order to create sections with a special functionality. sometimes i even use a [send]/[receive]-pair instead of a patch cord, just for readability
When it's just that i want to avoid cluttering a patch that's already too big, i don't mind using [s]/[r] pairs, but sometimes I have only a handful of objects and there's an objectbox i can't read unless i move it or one of the surrounding objects (so that the cords move out of the way), and i can't make all objectboxes clearly readable unless I put them in a very unnatural position.
But then, I've said that for 3 years...
$0-send/receive: what would be the difference to a NOT-fake-mechanism?
Avoiding pollution of the symbol-table?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada