On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Orm Finnendahl hat gesagt: // Orm Finnendahl wrote:
my concerns are exactly the same as your's. My thoughts go along the following lines:
add a right inlet to send the way you suggest (which wouldn't break anything).
if send gets initialized without argument, the first element of a received list is the target. This could break things although it seems rather unlikely that anybody ever used send without arguments, as any message received in such an object would get discarded.
We already have this functionality as externals (sprinkler) and as a message-based solution, so I don't see the reason for such a patch.
Are you referring to the second proposal or to the whole patch ? While I think that it is probably better not to implement the sprinkler like behaviour, I think the second inlet would be a very welcome addition.
I don't think that it would be harmful, just considering that Miller is conservative in changing behaviour of objects it is more likely that the patch gets accepted if it only implements the second inlet.
As my example with the array receiver showed, there is no elegant solution without using externals.
But then, my case was certainly very special, the next time I would do it with a script from outside Pd.
Günter