[PD] [inlet], [outlet].

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On 6 May 2003, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> Josh Steiner wrote:
> > Marc, the order that messages are passed down multiple patch chords 
> > coming from the same outlet is based on the order they were connected, 
> > not their right to left placement.
> So the order is not random as Mathieu was suggesting. But doesn't Max
> respects the right to left order? That's how I learned about Max in the
> first place. (I can't test it, I don't have a Macintosh up and running)

This is a particular meaning of random. Actually for better clarity I
should have called this the prolly-not-what-you-want order, or the
unreliable order, or the you-don't-see-it-on-the-screen order, or
arbitrary order, or actually all of the above.

> That's what I do anytime I need to make sure the timing is correct,
> mostly because I move objects in the patch. But I'd like PD to respect
> the right to left order instead of the connection order. Would it be
> possible?

coming from jMax I would tend to stick with the PD/jMax way, but would
like PD to get the currently-jMax-specific improvements,
which are numbered [inlet]/[outlet] objects, and the [fork] object.

BTW: I have a system in which patchers are scripted, and so they contain
objects that have no position at all. How does your model fit with that?
Is there a way (of doing, and/or, of thinking about it) that is elegant
with both visual and non-visual systems ?

________________________________________________________________
Mathieu Bouchard                       http://artengine.ca/matju