hi, not sure if this has been raised before,
but why does number2 kill its inlet when you add a recieve in the properties box?
i can't really see the practicality of this, and there are plenty of times when you might want to set the recieve symbol AND have access to the inlet.
matt
Hi,
The visual representation of the inlet/outlet in number2 does disapear, but you can still connect to it just the same as if no receive was specified. Just pretend there is an inlet/outlet visible and it works as expected.
With the original number box the inlet does actually disapear, and you cannot connect anything to it.
I would say number should act like number2 myself.
B.
hi, not sure if this has been raised before,
but why does number2 kill its inlet when you add a recieve in the properties box?
i can't really see the practicality of this, and there are plenty of times when you might want to set the recieve symbol AND have access to the inlet.
matt
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
but what's the purpose of the disappearing inlet/outlet?
maybe there's a good reason for it, but if you can still connect it seems to make more sense to have an inlet/outlet visible...and i know i'm not the only one who thinks that way.
I read:
but what's the purpose of the disappearing inlet/outlet?
a) it's immedialely visible that the nbx sends to somewhere not connected b) aesthically it might make sense when you build completely s/r based GUIs
regards,
x
My original thought was to make it easier to debug patches, that controls should have a different appearance when they "send" or "receive" messages from elsewhere. If you see a number changing that's connected to an input on the screen, it's easy to assume that there are actually messages passing down the connection. Worse yet, you can copy and past a number into another part of a patch and then be confused when it changes unexpectedly because it's still got a hidden "receive". So all in all I prefer suppressing the inlet -- REALLY suppressing it, like "number" -- over providing it, and the same with the outlet if the box "sends".
I think it's a bad idea simply not to _draw_ the inlet and outlet, but to implement them anyway, as the IEMGUIs do. If there were some other way to distinguish the boxes graphically, that would be better, but I can't think what it would be.
cheers Miller
On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 06:16:54PM +0900, hard off wrote:
but what's the purpose of the disappearing inlet/outlet?
maybe there's a good reason for it, but if you can still connect it seems to make more sense to have an inlet/outlet visible...and i know i'm not the only one who thinks that way.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
B. Bogart -
CK -
hard off -
Miller Puckette