Hello list,
I am trying to make a GOP abstraction for [writesf~] and I would like the creation arg ($1) to be a path, so I could then have a symbol box for the filename to write. I need the creation argument to combine with the symbol, for example:
creation argument: /Users/me/Desktop symbol: fooey.wav
result: /Users/me/Desktop/fooey.wav (this will be part of the "open" message sent to writesf~)
So I guess I need to add another "/" in there too... any ideas? When you pack things together it puts a space in between them which won't work for this :)
Thanks! Kevin
Hello Kevin,
What you needed to do was pack things together and then make a message box that looks like [$1$2(
This will combine the elements without a space between them.
Good luck, Yourself
On 4/4/07, Kevin McCoy km.takewithyou@gmail.com wrote:
Hello list,
I am trying to make a GOP abstraction for [writesf~] and I would like the creation arg ($1) to be a path, so I could then have a symbol box for the filename to write. I need the creation argument to combine with the symbol, for example:
creation argument: /Users/me/Desktop symbol: fooey.wav
result: /Users/me/Desktop/fooey.wav (this will be part of the "open" message sent to writesf~)
So I guess I need to add another "/" in there too... any ideas? When you pack things together it puts a space in between them which won't work for this :)
Thanks! Kevin
--
A ha - that will work always. [$1$2( doesn't work in 0.39, only in .40 and later it seems. At least that's my guess.
Thank you! Kevin
On 4/4/07, hard off hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
[pack s s] | [makesymbol %s%s]
?
Quoting hard off hard.off@gmail.com:
[pack s s] | [makesymbol %s%s]
this would require zexy. and when you already need zexy, i would suggest to use
[loadbang]
|
[symbol(
| | [list2symbol] |
mfg.asdr IOhannes
IOhannes, is makesymbol going to be zapped from zexy in the future?
is there any particular reason why we shouldn't use makesymbol?
Hallo, hard off hat gesagt: // hard off wrote:
IOhannes, is makesymbol going to be zapped from zexy in the future?
is there any particular reason why we shouldn't use makesymbol?
I don't know about the future of makesymbol, but on many occasions you could use makefilename instead, and for simple concatenation of symbols, modern msg-boxes are good enough as well.
You can also concatenate two symbols with makefilename by using a "set" meta-message and double-percent-signs like: [set %s/%%s(. See the example in the helpfile for makefilename for details.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
i have so many patches with makesymbol constructs. personally i hope it stays in there just so i don't have to go and redo them all when i upgrade to 0.40
i guess until then i'll start using [l2s]
Hello,
I posted an abstraction a while ago that handles this problem: http://www.mail-archive.com/pd-list@iem.at/msg04851.html
It will concatenate two inputs. It works with symbols and numbers correctly. (Converts numbers to symbols.) It uses makefilename internally.
Cheers, Steve
On 4/5/07, hard off hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
i have so many patches with makesymbol constructs. personally i hope it stays in there just so i don't have to go and redo them all when i upgrade to 0.40
i guess until then i'll start using [l2s]
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hallo, hard off hat gesagt: // hard off wrote:
i have so many patches with makesymbol constructs. personally i hope it stays in there just so i don't have to go and redo them all when i upgrade to 0.40
i guess until then i'll start using [l2s]
Or the [list-l2s] abstraction from [list]-abs. ;)
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
On 05/04/2007, at 16.12, hard off wrote:
i have so many patches with makesymbol constructs. personally i hope it stays in there just so i don't have to go and redo them all when i upgrade to 0.40
makesymbol is zexy. So you won't loose if you upgrade Pd and keep
zexy. If im not mistaken. Unless you mean that makesymbol was kicked
out of zexy version 0.40 and then got back in later on. This is
getting hairy.
this thread is getting a bit funny and people start to be afraid about [makesymbol] being deprecated ;-)
as i understand IOhannes, there is nothing wrong with [makesymbol] (nor with any other proposed solution). i think, he just wanted to point out that when externals are involved anyway - [makesymbol] from zexy in that specific case - , one could also use [l2s] - also from zexy - for that task, which could be considered as more straight forward. i assume, it was never meant to say, that [makesymbol] will be kicked out from zexy with growing (>0.40) pd version nor with growing zexy versions (actually 2.1 iirc).
so, take the solution of your choice:
[makesymbol]: needs zexy [makefilename]: a bit more complicated (see franks suggestion), but works only with internals [l2s]: needs zexy as well [$1$2(: only internals, but works only with pd >= 0.40
i hope, i could make things a bit clearer now.
roman
On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 20:05 +0200, Steffen wrote:
On 05/04/2007, at 16.12, hard off wrote:
i have so many patches with makesymbol constructs. personally i hope it stays in there just so i don't have to go and redo them all when i upgrade to 0.40
makesymbol is zexy. So you won't loose if you upgrade Pd and keep
zexy. If im not mistaken. Unless you mean that makesymbol was kicked
out of zexy version 0.40 and then got back in later on. This is
getting hairy.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
Thanks Roman - nice consolidation.
And thanks everyone else - when I have a minute I am going to finish the patch :) NOW if I could only get it to stay the same size as the GOP bounds.. a big creation argument makes the object box really long! Anyone know any tricks with that? I haven't tried different versions.
Kevin
On 4/5/07, Roman Haefeli reduzierer@yahoo.de wrote:
this thread is getting a bit funny and people start to be afraid about [makesymbol] being deprecated ;-)
as i understand IOhannes, there is nothing wrong with [makesymbol] (nor with any other proposed solution). i think, he just wanted to point out that when externals are involved anyway - [makesymbol] from zexy in that specific case - , one could also use [l2s] - also from zexy - for that task, which could be considered as more straight forward. i assume, it was never meant to say, that [makesymbol] will be kicked out from zexy with growing (>0.40) pd version nor with growing zexy versions (actually 2.1 iirc).
so, take the solution of your choice:
[makesymbol]: needs zexy [makefilename]: a bit more complicated (see franks suggestion), but works only with internals [l2s]: needs zexy as well [$1$2(: only internals, but works only with pd >= 0.40
i hope, i could make things a bit clearer now.
roman
On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 20:05 +0200, Steffen wrote:
On 05/04/2007, at 16.12, hard off wrote:
i have so many patches with makesymbol constructs. personally i hope it stays in there just so i don't have to go and redo them all when i upgrade to 0.40
makesymbol is zexy. So you won't loose if you upgrade Pd and keep zexy. If im not mistaken. Unless you mean that makesymbol was kicked out of zexy version 0.40 and then got back in later on. This is getting hairy.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hallo, Kevin McCoy hat gesagt: // Kevin McCoy wrote:
And thanks everyone else - when I have a minute I am going to finish the patch :) NOW if I could only get it to stay the same size as the GOP bounds.. a big creation argument makes the object box really long!
In the latest stable version of Pd, which is 0.40, you can use the "Hide object name and arguments" canvas property below "graph on parent" to do exactly this.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
Now that's tight. I need to upgrade once and for all soon.
Thanks, Kevin
On 4/6/07, Frank Barknecht fbar@footils.org wrote:
In the latest stable version of Pd, which is 0.40, you can use the "Hide object name and arguments" canvas property below "graph on parent" to do exactly this.
On 05/04/2007, at 22.52, Roman Haefeli wrote:
as i understand IOhannes, there is nothing wrong with [makesymbol]
(nor with any other proposed solution). i think, he just wanted to point
out that when externals are involved anyway - [makesymbol] from zexy in
that specific case - , one could also use [l2s] - also from zexy - for that task, which could be considered as more straight forward. i assume, it was never meant to say, that [makesymbol] will be kicked out from zexy with growing (>0.40) pd version nor with growing zexy versions
(actually 2.1 iirc).
Just to make sure: That's how i understand it too. - And tried to
point out in a less straight manner.
hard off wrote:
IOhannes, is makesymbol going to be zapped from zexy in the future?
i don't think so (though i would love to...)
is there any particular reason why we shouldn't use makesymbol?
not really, apart from the fact that it really does not do what it claims to do. it _should_ have been a better [makefilename], and it turned out to be a worse one: while [makefilename] at least supports 2 types of formatting (%s and %d), [makesymbol] only allows one (%s). the only good thing about this object is its name....
i suggested [l2s] mainly, because you can also use it to "pack symbols" of a 3 element list, or a 12 element list (which btw, you cannot do with [makesymbol], or an N element list.
fmas.dr IOhannes
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Frank Barknecht -
hard off -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Kevin McCoy -
Roman Haefeli -
Steffen -
Stephen Sinclair -
zmoelnig＠iem.at