propertybang-help.pd says that [propertybang] is per abstraction, but it's per abstraction _instance_, right?
Also, it states that you can't have them per subpatch-- what exactly does this mean?
Thanks, Jonathan
On 2010-03-31 19:49, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
propertybang-help.pd says that [propertybang] is per abstraction, but it's per abstraction _instance_, right?
indeed. but hen: how would you right-click on an abstraction class (that is: not an instance?)
Also, it states that you can't have them per subpatch-- what exactly does this mean?
i guess it means that you cannot put it into a subpatch and expect the subpatch to have properties.
sorry if the answers sound obvious.
fgasmdr IOhannes
On 2010-04-01 16:21, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
On 2010-03-31 19:49, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
propertybang-help.pd says that [propertybang] is per abstraction, but it's per abstraction _instance_, right?
indeed. but hen: how would you right-click on an abstraction class (that is: not an instance?)
Also, it states that you can't have them per subpatch-- what exactly does this mean?
i guess it means that you cannot put it into a subpatch and expect the subpatch to have properties.
as a matter of fact this is wrong. you can put [propertybang] into your [pd] and be happy with it. i updated the help-patch.
fgam,sdr IOhannes
--- On Thu, 4/1/10, IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
From: IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD] propertybang-help To: "Jonathan Wilkes" jancsika@yahoo.com Cc: "pd-list" PD-list@iem.at Date: Thursday, April 1, 2010, 4:52 PM On 2010-04-01 16:21, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
On 2010-03-31 19:49, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
propertybang-help.pd says that [propertybang] is
per abstraction, but it's
per abstraction _instance_, right?
indeed. but hen: how would you right-click on an abstraction
class (that is: not
an instance?)
That's currently the problem with your help patch. The behavior of the object is clear from the usage description, but then you decide to put "per abstraction" in all caps, which made me wonder whether you mean "per abstraction instance"-- the desired behavior-- or "per abstraction class"-- in which case I would take it to mean right-clicking one instance sends a bang to _all_ instances. Then you said at the bottom that "you cannot have [propertybang]s per subpatch," which confirms the latter (see "2.7. subpatches"), which would render the object useless and make me think it's just not finished yet. So I have to build my own abstraction and test the object to see whether the it does something useful, which defeats the whole purpose of having the help patch in the first place.
Why not just add two instances of an abstraction to the example?
Also you say: "having multiple [propertybang]s within one abstraction, will trigger them all at the same time."
What else would anyone expect? (And technically they are triggered in the order they were created, but I think it all goes without saying anyway.)
Also- in canvasposition-help.pd you erroneously begin the patch with a [canvasindex] object.
Also, it states that you can't have them per
subpatch-- what exactly does
this mean?
i guess it means that you cannot put it into a
subpatch and expect the
subpatch to have properties.
as a matter of fact this is wrong. you can put [propertybang] into your [pd] and be happy with it. i updated the help-patch.
fgam,sdr IOhannes
On 2010-04-01 18:11, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
Why not just add two instances of an abstraction to the example?
there should be an examples folder (i don't know whether you are using pd-extended and if so, whether the examples are included)
Also you say: "having multiple [propertybang]s within one abstraction, will trigger them all at the same time."
What else would anyone expect? (And technically they are triggered in the order they were created, but I think it all goes without saying anyway.)
sure; but who knows what people expect?
anyhow, as said in my other mail, i have updated the help patch.
Also- in canvasposition-help.pd you erroneously begin the patch with a [canvasindex] object.
and i missed that one...
fgmasdr IOhannes
On 2010-04-01 18:11, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
That's currently the problem with your help patch. The behavior of the object is clear from the usage description, but then you decide to put "per abstraction" in all caps, which made me wonder whether you mean "per abstraction instance"-- the desired behavior-- or "per abstraction class"-- in which case I would take it to mean right-clicking one instance sends a bang to _all_ instances. Then you said at the bottom that "you
it does the "desired" behaviour.
cannot have [propertybang]s per subpatch," which confirms the latter (see "2.7. subpatches"),
"subpatch" in the help patch means what is commonly called "subpatch" (aka [pd]) which is a "one-off subpatch" in the docs.
which would render the object useless and make me think it's just not finished yet. So I have to build my own abstraction and test the object to see whether the it does something useful, which defeats the whole purpose of having the help patch in the first place.
i cannot follow. i don't like help-patches that are not self-contained (at least for what they are trying to document); in older versions [propertybang] obviously did not work for "one-off subpatches" (hence the documentation about this), which made it a bit hard to show without abstractions. otoh, creating an abstraction yourself and test whether the object indeed does what _you_ want it do, is not so complicated.
anyhow, thanks for the feedback.
fgasdr IOhannes
PS: and yes, iemguts is basically undocumented.
--- On Thu, 4/1/10, IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
From: IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD] propertybang-help To: "Jonathan Wilkes" jancsika@yahoo.com Cc: "pd-list" PD-list@iem.at Date: Thursday, April 1, 2010, 7:31 PM On 2010-04-01 18:11, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
That's currently the problem with your help
patch. The behavior of the
object is clear from the usage description, but then
you decide to put
"per abstraction" in all caps, which made me wonder
whether you mean
"per abstraction instance"-- the desired behavior-- or
"per abstraction class"-- in which case I would take it to mean right-clicking one instance
sends a bang to _all_ instances. Then you said
at the bottom that "you
it does the "desired" behaviour.
cannot have [propertybang]s per subpatch," which
confirms the latter (see
"2.7. subpatches"),
"subpatch" in the help patch means what is commonly called "subpatch" (aka [pd]) which is a "one-off subpatch" in the docs.
which would render the object useless and make
me
think it's just not finished yet. So I have to
build my own abstraction
and test the object to see whether the it does
something useful, which
defeats the whole purpose of having the help patch in
the first place.
i cannot follow. i don't like help-patches that are not self-contained (at least for what they are trying to document); in older versions [propertybang] obviously did not work for "one-off subpatches" (hence the documentation about this), which made it a bit hard to show without abstractions. otoh, creating an abstraction yourself and test whether the object indeed does what _you_ want it do, is not so complicated.
The vast majority of help patches are self-contained (excluding for the moment those that have objects from other libraries which may or may not exist). For those few patches that warrant an abstraction in the example, it's easier (on the reader of the subpatch) to include an example abstraction than to describe what the behavior would be were an abstraction included (which may or may not be up to date). Right-clicking "Properties" on one [foo] object and noticing that a bang does not come out a different [foo] object takes a few seconds to comprehend, unlike your "PER ABSTRACTION" paragraph which takes a message to a mailing list and revisions to correct/clarify the meaning.
Also, please note that I'm talking about about an example of the core behavior of [propertybang], not an example of how it might be useful in a real (albeit simplified) patch. Only the latter belong in the "examples" folder. I.e., "5.reference" = what it does, "examples" = how it might be used.
-Jonathan
-
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Jonathan Wilkes