Thank you Iohannes for your answer.

I have me too several doubts about the way I wrote it and in general if there is a "good" way to implement this feature.

About your questions, it works with -noloadbang mode and in subpatch. If I put a [loadbang] with the same delay than the [loadmess] clock [loadmess] arrives first.

Anyway, actually I don't think to make public this code because I'm not convince about it.

Thank you again.

Best regards.

2016-03-31 14:52 GMT+02:00 IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoelnig@iem.at>:

On 2016-03-31 12:32, Marco Matteo Markidis wrote:
> So, it is not the best programming practice but it works and it is quite
> transparent from the user point of view.

i think it is less question of "good programming practice" but of (not)
breaking functionality.
if you introduce some clock delay, then the object make break the
expected order of execution.
- how does it work in "-nogui" mode?
- how does it work in "-noloadbang" mode?
- how does it work if the object is hidden in a sub-patch/abstraction?
- how does it relate to other [loadbang]s?
- how does it relate to other nested [loadbang]s?
- how does it work with other [delay]ed [loadbang]s?

using [delay] to ensure a certain order of execution can often lead to
subtle problems.
i wonder whether the feature of being able to suppress the bang via a
pressed key during load time is worth the potential problems it makes.

fgamsdr
IOhannes

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list