From: IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoelnig@iem.at Subject: Re: [Pd] Feature request: simultaneous connections To: Jo?o Miguel Pais jmmmpais@googlemail.com Cc: PD-List pd-list@iem.at Message-ID: <4417CFFE.20702@iem.at > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
João Miguel Pais wrote:
... and then people will complain that their patches do strange things because they created fanning-connections with undefined execution order instead of properly using the trigger-object.
I don't think it's a good idea to encourage outlet-fanning with a keyboard shortcut.
you don't need trigger for all occasions. sometimes it doesn't matter in which order the messages are sent, only that they arrive - like in come cases where building a spider web is necessary because of lots of
this is true, but it is a special case where the programmer has to know that the order does not matter. it is a bad design for a programming language, if it tends to create programs that behave "somehow".
I guess I agree, for connecting one outlet to multiple inlets, but I still see no problem with being able to connect multiple outlets to one inlet.
-Chuckk
But it's also not that bad to let people make mistakes. Then they'll learn quite faster.
allowing people to make mistakes is something different than helping (enforcing) people to make mistakes. the former could be considered as some (weird) form of education, while the latter is just offending.
mfg.asdr. IOhannes
Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
I guess I agree, for connecting one outlet to multiple inlets, but I still see no problem with being able to connect multiple outlets to one inlet.
me neither, it would be quite handy....
mfg.asd.r IOhannes
"Chuckk Hubbard" badmuthahubbard@gmail.com writes:
I guess I agree, for connecting one outlet to multiple inlets, but I still see no problem with being able to connect multiple outlets to one inlet.
or multiple outlets to multiple inlets, for that matter.
./MiS
Hallo, Michal Seta hat gesagt: // Michal Seta wrote:
"Chuckk Hubbard" badmuthahubbard@gmail.com writes:
I guess I agree, for connecting one outlet to multiple inlets, but I still see no problem with being able to connect multiple outlets to one inlet.
or multiple outlets to multiple inlets, for that matter.
Actually that idea already was mentioned once by Miller, IIRC. This is a bad example, but basically it's about making things like this easier:
[unpack 0 0 0 0 0] | | | | | [pack 0 0 0 0 0]
The idea around this is to allow making connections by a keyboard shortcut instead of drawing a connection with the mouse, which is something, many people have motorical (is this the correct word?) problems with.
It would be great to be able to select two objects then press whatever key and a connection would magically appear between the upper and the lower object.
Some way would be needed to allow connections to non-matching xlets, like connecting an object's first outlet to the second inlet of another object as in:
[0\
|
[+ 10]
All these are very useful operations that don't explicitly encourage "wrong" patching habits and are more flexible in the long run anyways than making connections between one outlet and many inlets or one inlet and many outlets a tiny bit easier.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
Hi Chuckk,
less rich text format pls. it triplicates the time it takes to receive your messages.
kthx
./d5
On Mar 15, 2006, at 6:31 AM, Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
From: IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoelnig@iem.at Subject: Re: [Pd] Feature request: simultaneous connections To: Jo?o Miguel Pais < jmmmpais@googlemail.com> Cc: PD-List < pd-list@iem.at> Message-ID: <4417CFFE.20702@iem.at > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
João Miguel Pais wrote:
... and then people will complain that their patches do strange
things
because they created fanning-connections with undefined execution order instead of properly using the trigger-object.
I don't think it's a good idea to encourage outlet-fanning with a keyboard shortcut.
you don't need trigger for all occasions. sometimes it doesn't
matter
in which order the messages are sent, only that they arrive - like
in
come cases where building a spider web is necessary because of
lots of
this is true, but it is a special case where the programmer has to
know
that the order does not matter. it is a bad design for a programming language, if it tends to create programs that behave "somehow".
I guess I agree, for connecting one outlet to multiple inlets, but I still see no problem with being able to connect multiple outlets to one inlet. -Chuckk
But it's also not that bad to let people make mistakes. Then they'll learn quite faster.
allowing people to make mistakes is something different than helping (enforcing) people to make mistakes. the former could be considered as some (weird) form of education,
while
the latter is just offending.
mfg.asdr. IOhannes _______________________________________________
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Chuckk Hubbard -
day 5 -
Frank Barknecht -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Michal Seta