[PD-dev] $0 in messages, was: multiple $arg-expansion

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

Thomas Grill wrote:
>
>> do you mean, is there a reason for my patch, a reason for $0 or a 
>> reason for $0 being "different" in messages?
> 
> 
> the latter (your patch is great, although i'd like to have even more 

well i think this is very consistent: $args in messages refer _only_ to 
parameters of incoming messages, while $args in objects refer only to 
parameters of upstream objects. (and $0 is bound to the class instance)

however, i think that "$0" is a bad name.
i would have liked it better if $0 was the selector (in messages) and 
the classname (in abstractions).
probably "$$" would have been better for a uniq id (well, i know that 
this is a bashism (its the process-id in bash), but that is not 
necessarily bad)

> flexible $args-processing). 

this is on my todo-list.
1st thing todo (soon!) is to remove the restriction that dollsyms have 
to start with $ (while this restriction makes parsing trivial it is 
cumbersome at the best)
2nd thing todo (LATER!) is a mechanism for stacked $args, like ${$1-2}


> Sorry for continuing in your thread.

better in this thread than never...


mfmgasdr
IOhannes