As I say, I could neaten this in a number of ways, I was considering some form of [loadbang] triggered script to delete the objects on creation, then use a delay to initialize the generative patch. Which would also solve the problem.

> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 10:00:40 +0200
> From: fbar@footils.org
> To: pd-list@iem.at
> Subject: Re: [PD] Pd "monosymphonia"
>
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 12:32:27AM +0100, Andrew Faraday wrote:
> > P.S. I do realize that I could clean this up a great deal. The addition of
> > [table] objects could just as easily be a single expanding array, I could
> > hide modules away in sub patches and the sliders used for visualization could
> > be more efficiently done with gem.
>
> Regarding subpatches: I would do this kind of dynamic object generation in a
> subpatch anyway instead of putting the new objects into the main patch. That
> way, you can easily start with a fresh subpatch by sending "clean" to [s
> pd-subpatchname] instead of having to manually delete the created
> tables/objects.
>
> Ciao
> --
> Frank Barknecht Do You RjDj.me? _ ______footils.org__
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list