Hallo, Matteo Sisti Sette hat gesagt: // Matteo Sisti Sette wrote:
Frank Barknecht wrote
Try:
[clear( | [s $0something]
That's why [namecanvas] is not the final word on the functionality it provides.
I don't understand what you mean. If you mean because it makes PD crash, then try this:
[clear( | [s pd-whateverthisfileiscalled.pd]
with no use of [namecanvas]. This crashes too.
Well, that's an error of the patch-author. But clearing a patch containing a [namecanvas] doesn't crash Pd, it just makes the named canvas unavailable for further processing. Attached patch illustrates this behaviour.
The workaround of creating a subpatch (which you may call $0- or $1-something) is ok if all the dynamically generated stuff is "processing stuff", but what if we are dinamically generating interface elements? It is not irrelevant to have to go one level deeper in the patch tree to get a piece of interface visible. I can think of real-life scenarios...
Well, as I mentioned, this is one usecase for namecanvas, that's not possible with subpatches. But it's a usecase, that not necessarily requires a namepatch-object, it is probably better realized with canvas-Properties similar to graph-on-parent etc.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__