I think that even in the case of an external, it's difficult to know whether there's a signal connected to a signal inlet, or not. I think Eric Lyon's externals do what you want (maintain their signal inlet even if they're provided with an argument), but haven't understood how he does that (even though I've read his book about externals...).

Converting an inlet to a control inlet if there's an argument provided, is quite easy, on the contrary.

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote:

So that's why I guess it has to be an object...

Moreover, some objects in pd have this interesting behavior.

When you have an argument in [*~], for example, it turns the second inlet into a data only inlet (no signal).

I found this behaviour even in some externals like [>~] in zexy, so I wonder if this is some restriction of pd objects itself, or if it was just a design option that was replicated in zexy on purpose.

If I have to do this as an object, I'd like it to maintain a signal inlet even though I have number argument. So I hope there's nothing "weird" in Pd that doesn't allow this to happen.

cheers

2015-02-24 14:26 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com>:

I thought about it, but the the problem is that I'd like the signal to update the incoming value even if it is 0...

so it doesn't quite make it.

thanks

2015-02-24 14:20 GMT-03:00 Joe White <white.joe4@gmail.com>:

Hey Alexandre,

Does this do want you want? Toggles between a signal input converted to control rate and a default value (if the signal is 0)

Cheers,
Joe

On 24 February 2015 at 17:08, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote:
hi, trying to make an abstraction here that loads a number argument into an audio signal chain, but I'd like to update the argument to whatever is coming from an [inlet~], but then I'd like to load back the argument whenever there is no signal connected to this inlet.

The only way to do this is if I know wether there was something connected to this inlet or not, and I believe that's impossible in a subpatch/abstraction, right?

So, the only way out would be compiling a new object, huh?

thanks

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

--
Follow me on Twitter @diplojocus

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