Excerpt from a PD class in 2010 (when $0 for message boxes has been implemented meaning the same as a $0 in an object box):
STUDENT: So a $ sign in an object means a creation argument of the abstraction instance. But I've seen some $0's around... I thought $1 was the first creation argument. TEACHER: Yes, $1 is the first creation argument. $0 is a sort of special implicit creation argument which is a number assigned by PD unique to a patch. It is especially useful as a prefix for assigning "local" names to sends, receives, values, etc. STUDENT: Oh, I see. Now, I have tried using $1 and $2 in this message box, but I get confusing and unexpected results. TEACHER: (looks at the student's patch) That's because a dollar sign in a message box is not the same as a dollar sign in an object box. In a message box, $1 and $2 are the first and second argument of the message that is input to the message box. They may change every time a message is received. STUDENT: (showing another patch) Oh. So what does the $0 mean in this message box? TEACHER: Well, $0 in a message box *is* the same as in an object box. So you can access the $0 of the patch from within a message without making a clump around the message box. STUDENT: And what if I need to access the $1 or $2 of the patch from within a message? TEACHER: You have to make a clump around the message box.
-- Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f
Sponsor: La soluzione per vendere o coprare qualcosa, la trovi su Email.it Annunci! Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=6892&d=21-8
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007, Matteo Sisti Sette wrote:
Excerpt from a PD class in 2010 (when $0 for message boxes has been implemented meaning the same as a $0 in an object box): TEACHER: You have to make a clump around the message box.
Well, there's a reason why the FTS format's messagebox class was abbreviated to "messbox". it's messy. Pd instead calls it MSG, which is a kind of syntactic salt which downregulates hypothalamic appetite suppression in patches, making them fat. It's also possible to commit suicide using MSG: http://www.visayandailystar.com/2006/March/16/topstory7.htm
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal QC Canada
Hi, I love fiction, so let me give a try of a scenario, :)
Matteo Sisti Sette a écrit :
Excerpt from a PD
session with the 0.5 version):
The user needs to implement $0 into a message for expressing the implicit creation argument of the abstraction, so his instinct and lack of practice makes him using $0 into the messagebox, but at his surprise the pd console says after creation:
"error: $0 is not a good MSG argument, please use $1 $2 ... $n for getting incoming message arguments or read documentation chapter 2.6.5 about dollar signs"
The user is very stuborn and tries again to make many messages with using $0 in messagebox, then the console shows the following error:
"error: see above error: see above error: see above error: see above error: see above error: see above ... "
-
Mathieu Bouchard -
Matteo Sisti Sette -
Patrice Colet