Hi Greg,

I think the best way is to keep the arrays _outside_ the abstractions and just have the abstractions refer to them by name. Abstractions themselves can't save internal "state"; two instances of the same abstraction are, by design, identical except in their arguments.

It's also possible to save and restore arrays within abstractions manually, but I think it's almost always better to have the calling patch own the data.

cheers Miller

On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 10:46:58PM -0400, Greg Rippin wrote:

A restatement of a previous question, with some added clarification:

Attached are two files, "arraytest.pd" and "arraytesttwo.pd". "arraytest" contains a small array, called "test". "arraytesttwo" contains a copy of the abstraction "arraytest" and a tabwrite object to modify the array "test" that exists inside of "arraytest." My question is: having modified the array "test," how can I save the modified array without a) writing it's contents to a text file, or b) manually opening up and saving "arraytest" ?

Since (I believe) an array is saved when the patch that contains it is saved, a more direct question is: is there a way to save the contents of a sub-patch without actually opening up the sub-patch and telling it to save?

I checked the pd list archive and the pd documentation but couldn't find answers to these questions, so any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Greg NYU

-- Greg Rippin, Graduate Assistant Music Technology Program New York University 35 West 4th Street, Suite 777 New York, NY 10012

phone 212-998-5422 fax 212-995-4043 musictechgrad.info@nyu.edu www.nyu.edu

#N canvas 0 0 458 308 12; #X obj 266 74 arraytest; #X obj 56 133 tabwrite test; #X floatatom 56 73 4 -2 2; #X floatatom 155 75 4 0 4; #X connect 2 0 1 0; #X connect 3 0 1 1;

#N canvas 0 0 460 310 12; #X graph graph11 0 -2 4 2 100 160 300 20; #X array test 5 float 1; #A 0 1.68571 -0.0571429 -1.88571 1.22857 2; #X pop;