I worked on this for a while in 2008. A big part of the problem is that the architecture for first/main inlets is quite different from generic inlets, which do not respond to both signals and messages. [inlet~] does (or at least is supposed to) promote floats to signals, but it won't pass other kinds of messages; and it seemed like too deep a problem to be solved without a pretty serious overhaul. This was a number of years ago and things may have changed since then, but I don't think so (though I'd be glad to be wrong).
Matt
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Christof Ressi christof.ressi@gmx.at wrote:
I was wondering about that too! After a quick search in the mailarchives I've found this discussion from 2008: http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2008-06/062895.html
@IOhannes: What's the state now? How difficult would it be to make an [inlet~] external which, for example, passes signals to a left outlet and all messages (also floats!) to a right outlet. Or which passes everything it receives and then you could use [route~] from zexy to separate signals from messages?
*Gesendet:* Freitag, 18. September 2015 um 12:49 Uhr *Von:* "Liam Goodacre" liamg_uw@hotmail.com *An:* "pd-list@lists.iem.at" pd-list@lists.iem.at *Betreff:* [PD] getting [inlet~] to accept data Many objects (ie. [osc~]) have a sort of a hybrid inlet which accepts both signal and data input. However, the [inlet~] object seems to reject data. If I wanted to build an abstraction with an [inlet~] that accepts both signal and data, is there any other way? _______________________________________________ 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