Hi Miller, In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation? Best,Jonathan
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang", rather it should be "list".
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/.
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote:
Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang", rather it should be "list".
Let's back up. Miller, In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector? Thanks,Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/.
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote:
Hi Miller, In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation? Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree
with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/.
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree
with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/.
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
contrary to the list method, the selector for the anything method *does* carry significant meaning. At the very least, it's necessary for the default anything method (which prints an error message).
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:29, Christof Ressi wrote:
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have
agree with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/.
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 6:34:02 PM EDT, Christof Ressi info@christofressi.com wrote:
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
contrary to the list method, the selector for the anything method *does* carry significant meaning. At the very least, it's necessary for the default anything method (which prints an error message).
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
Thanks, Jonathan
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:29, Christof Ressi wrote:
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
> On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi <info@christofressi.com> wrote:
> Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang", rather it should be "list".
Let's back up. Miller, In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector? Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/.
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote:
Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation? Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
The selector is not *required* to selector to be NULL, but it *can* be NULL, with the only merit that it saves you a few characters.
if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
In the above mentioned discussion, IOhannes has offered two patches: 1) don't use NULL selectors internally, 2) gracefully handle NULL selectors (e.g. coming from externals)
Those patches obviously haven't been merged, but I think they should be reconsidered.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:47, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 6:34:02 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector? contrary to the list method, the selector for the anything method
*does* carry significant meaning. At the very least, it's necessary for the default anything method (which prints an error message).
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
Thanks, Jonathan
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:29, Christof Ressi wrote:
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com mailto:info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree
with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/.
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
As far as I know, there's no design necessity that says it has to be zero. The selector in this case is unspecified. One could invent one ("foo" would be fine) or leave it at zero.
Perhaps objects should not depend on knowing a selector that might be undefined.
cheers Miller
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 12:55:47AM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
The selector is not *required* to selector to be NULL, but it *can* be NULL, with the only merit that it saves you a few characters.
if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
In the above mentioned discussion, IOhannes has offered two patches: 1) don't use NULL selectors internally, 2) gracefully handle NULL selectors (e.g. coming from externals)
Those patches obviously haven't been merged, but I think they should be reconsidered.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:47, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 6:34:02 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector? contrary to the list method, the selector for the anything method
*does* carry significant meaning. At the very least, it's necessary for the default anything method (which prints an error message).
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
Thanks, Jonathan
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:29, Christof Ressi wrote:
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com mailto:info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree
with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/... .
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Hi Miller,
Perhaps objects should not depend on knowing a selector that might be undefined.
The problem is that it is not really clear which selectors are allowed to be NULL, since it isn't explicitly stated anywhere :-)
Just for clarification: Do think that NULL is also a valid selector for "anything" messages? Pd doesn't perform any NULL checks before dereferencing the selector of such messages, e.g. in "print_anything" or "pd_defaultanything", so to me that suggests that NULL is only a valid selector for "list" messages.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 18:10, Miller Puckette wrote:
As far as I know, there's no design necessity that says it has to be zero. The selector in this case is unspecified. One could invent one ("foo" would be fine) or leave it at zero.
Perhaps objects should not depend on knowing a selector that might be undefined.
cheers Miller
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 12:55:47AM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
The selector is not *required* to selector to be NULL, but it *can* be NULL, with the only merit that it saves you a few characters.
if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
In the above mentioned discussion, IOhannes has offered two patches: 1) don't use NULL selectors internally, 2) gracefully handle NULL selectors (e.g. coming from externals)
Those patches obviously haven't been merged, but I think they should be reconsidered.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:47, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 6:34:02 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector? contrary to the list method, the selector for the anything method
*does* carry significant meaning. At the very least, it's necessary for the default anything method (which prints an error message).
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
Thanks, Jonathan
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:29, Christof Ressi wrote:
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com mailto:info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree
with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/... .
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
I think Pd handles this somewhat inconsequentially. Sometimes, it calls list methods with 0, sometimes with &s_list. External developers might think that their code works, but it would crash in other places (as happened with zexy's [relay]).
Maybe Pd could always internally call list methods with a NULL selector, so that it's clear that the selector is not to be used?
Christof
On 21.06.2020 18:28, Christof Ressi wrote:
Hi Miller,
Perhaps objects should not depend on knowing a selector that might be undefined.
The problem is that it is not really clear which selectors are allowed to be NULL, since it isn't explicitly stated anywhere :-)
Just for clarification: Do think that NULL is also a valid selector for "anything" messages? Pd doesn't perform any NULL checks before dereferencing the selector of such messages, e.g. in "print_anything" or "pd_defaultanything", so to me that suggests that NULL is only a valid selector for "list" messages.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 18:10, Miller Puckette wrote:
As far as I know, there's no design necessity that says it has to be zero. The selector in this case is unspecified. One could invent one ("foo" would be fine) or leave it at zero.
Perhaps objects should not depend on knowing a selector that might be undefined.
cheers Miller
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 12:55:47AM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
The selector is not *required* to selector to be NULL, but it *can* be NULL, with the only merit that it saves you a few characters.
if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
In the above mentioned discussion, IOhannes has offered two patches: 1) don't use NULL selectors internally, 2) gracefully handle NULL selectors (e.g. coming from externals)
Those patches obviously haven't been merged, but I think they should be reconsidered.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:47, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 6:34:02 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector? contrary to the list method, the selector for the anything method
*does* carry significant meaning. At the very least, it's necessary for the default anything method (which prints an error message).
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
Thanks, Jonathan
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:29, Christof Ressi wrote:
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com mailto:info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree
with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/... .
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
I think 'anything' messages should always have a non-null selector. The only place I know of where a NULL sepector should be OK is the 'list' message.
cheers Miller
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 06:28:18PM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
Hi Miller,
Perhaps objects should not depend on knowing a selector that might be undefined.
The problem is that it is not really clear which selectors are allowed to be NULL, since it isn't explicitly stated anywhere :-)
Just for clarification: Do think that NULL is also a valid selector for "anything" messages? Pd doesn't perform any NULL checks before dereferencing the selector of such messages, e.g. in "print_anything" or "pd_defaultanything", so to me that suggests that NULL is only a valid selector for "list" messages.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 18:10, Miller Puckette wrote:
As far as I know, there's no design necessity that says it has to be zero. The selector in this case is unspecified. One could invent one ("foo" would be fine) or leave it at zero.
Perhaps objects should not depend on knowing a selector that might be undefined.
cheers Miller
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 12:55:47AM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
The selector is not *required* to selector to be NULL, but it *can* be NULL, with the only merit that it saves you a few characters.
if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
In the above mentioned discussion, IOhannes has offered two patches: 1) don't use NULL selectors internally, 2) gracefully handle NULL selectors (e.g. coming from externals)
Those patches obviously haven't been merged, but I think they should be reconsidered.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:47, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 6:34:02 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector? contrary to the list method, the selector for the anything method
*does* carry significant meaning. At the very least, it's necessary for the default anything method (which prints an error message).
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
Thanks, Jonathan
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:29, Christof Ressi wrote:
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com mailto:info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree
with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/... .
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 12:13:19 PM EDT, Miller Puckette via Pd-list pd-list@lists.iem.at wrote:
As far as I know, there's no design necessity that says it has to be zero.
The selector in this case is unspecified. One could invent one ("foo" would be fine) or leave it at zero.
Perhaps objects should not depend on knowing a selector that might be
undefined.
Thanks, Miller.
-Jonathan
cheers Miller
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 12:55:47AM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
The selector is not *required* to selector to be NULL, but it *can* be NULL, with the only merit that it saves you a few characters.
if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
In the above mentioned discussion, IOhannes has offered two patches: 1) don't use NULL selectors internally, 2) gracefully handle NULL selectors (e.g. coming from externals)
Those patches obviously haven't been merged, but I think they should be reconsidered.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:47, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 6:34:02 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com wrote:
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector? contrary to the list method, the selector for the anything method
*does* carry significant meaning. At the very least, it's necessary for the default anything method (which prints an error message).
I guess what I'm trying to ask is if there's a design constraint that requires the selector to be null in said code. Or better yet-- if the code were changed so that the selector is *never* null would bad things happen?
Thanks, Jonathan
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:29, Christof Ressi wrote:
Ah, sorry, I misread you're last reply. I thought you were repeating your first question :-)
On 21.06.2020 00:24, Christof Ressi wrote:
Did you read the discussion I've linked too? To quote Miller:
I'm not sure this is a real problem - _anything and _list methods simply aren't guaranteed anything about the "s" argument - it shouldn't ever be dereferenced.
I think this is the answer to your question. Since the selector of a list message is actually redundant, you're free to pass NULL.
Christof
On 21.06.2020 00:16, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:02:44 PM EDT, Christof Ressi
info@christofressi.com mailto:info@christofressi.com wrote:
Hi, the selector for a list method certainly shouldn't be "bang",
rather it should be "list".
Let's back up.
Miller,
In pd_defaultbang, what is the reasoning for calling the list method with a null selector while calling the anything method with an "&s_bang" selector?
Thanks, Jonathan
There has been a discussion about this in the past and I have agree
with IOhannes that Pd shouldn't send NULL selectors: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/patches/555/... .
Christof
On 20.06.2020 21:19, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: Hi Miller,
In pd_defaultbang of m_class.c, why does the list method get called with "0" for a selector instead of "&s_bang" for the c_listmethod invocation?
Best, Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!... _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list__;!...
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Christof Ressi -
Jonathan Wilkes -
Miller Puckette